W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > January 2011

[whatwg] Fwd: Video and audio types added to draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff

From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
Date: Mon, 24 Jan 2011 14:38:00 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTimzDWoKBKPR__mamg78DxHBu4yx9qqBsTNFUoFv@mail.gmail.com>
I didn't want to cross-post the below to avoid fragmented threads, but
I wanted to give the whatwgians a heads up as to the below.  Please
feel free to send me feedback in this forum or (preferably) on the
websec mailing list.

Thanks,
Adam


---------- Forwarded message ----------
From: Adam Barth <ietf@adambarth.com>
Date: Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 2:35 PM
Subject: Video and audio types added to draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff
To: websec <websec at ietf.org>


Websecians,

I've uploaded a new draft of draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff that
contains a handful of signatures for video and audio types supported
by web browsers:

http://www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff-01.txt

I've been trying to avoid getting embroiled in the video/audio format
mess, but several folks have asked me to add this information to the
document so that browsers can improve their interoperability.

As you can see, I've added WebP, Ogg, WAVE, and WebM:

http://tools.ietf.org//rfcdiff?url1=http%3A//www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff-00.txt&url2=http%3A//www.ietf.org/id/draft-ietf-websec-mime-sniff-01.txt

I would like to add MP3 and H.264 as well, but I'm unsure which
signatures to use. ?If you know which signatures we should use for
these formats, please let me know. ?Also, note that
http://www.w3.org/html/wg/wiki/ChangeProposals/NoVideoContentType will
likely have an effect on how we'll want to treat sniffing video,
depending on whether that change proposal prevails.

Thanks,
Adam
Received on Monday, 24 January 2011 14:38:00 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:59:30 UTC