- From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
- Date: Thu, 24 May 2007 18:25:17 +0000 (UTC)
On Thu, 24 May 2007, Jon Barnett wrote: > > I would propose that the "type" attribute be more meaningful on, for > example, the <a> element and the <object> element: > > - If the "type" attribute is present, the UA must use its value as the > value of the Accept request header when requesting a resource > > And then apply sniffing rules that take the Accept request header into > account (including wildcards in the Accept header): > - If the Accept request header accepts text/plain and not text/html, and the > Content-type response header is text/plain, it must not be sniffed as HTML. > - If the Accept request header does accept text/html, and the Content-type > response header is text/plain, it may be sniffed as HTML. > > That would allow, for example, Bugzilla to use <a type="text/plain"> > when linking to an attachment without fear that the attachment might be > sniffed as text/html. > > I don't know how that would break existing content, but I did want to > mention it. I don't think the "type" attribute is currently abused, > especially on links, in a way that would make this harmful. Interesting idea. Any browser vendors have any feedback on this? Any idea if it would break anything? There are millions of <a> elements with type="" attributes out there, I don't know if any of them would cause problems though. -- Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,. Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Thursday, 24 May 2007 11:25:17 UTC