- From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
- Date: Thu, 09 Dec 2010 01:04:55 -0500
On 12/8/10 8:19 PM, Ian Hickson wrote: >> You can't sniff in a toplevel browser window. Not the same way that >> people are sniffing in<video>. It would break the web. > > How so? People actually rely on the not-sniffing behavior of UAs in actual browser windows in some cases. For example, application/octet-stream at toplevel is somewhat commonly used to force downloads without a corresponding Content-Disposition header (poor practice, but support for Content-Disposition hasn't been historically great either). > (Note that the > spec as it stands takes a compromise position: the content is only > accepted if the Content-Type and type="" values are supported types (if > present) and the content sniffs as a supported type, but nothing in the > spec checks that all three values are the same.) Ah, I see. So similar to the way <img> is handled... I can't quite decide whether this is the best of both worlds, or the worst. ;) It certainly makes it simpler to implement video by delegating to QuickTime or the like, though I suspect such an implementation would also end up sniffing types the UA doesn't necessarily claim to support.... so maybe it's not simpler after all. -Boris
Received on Wednesday, 8 December 2010 22:04:55 UTC