- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Tue, 19 Feb 2002 08:43:34 +0100
- To: "Webdav WG" <w3c-dist-auth@w3c.org>
> From: w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org > [mailto:w3c-dist-auth-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of Lisa Dusseault > Sent: Monday, February 18, 2002 4:57 PM > To: Webdav WG; Julian Reschke > Subject: RE: rfc2518 issue: DEFER_LOCK_NULL_RESOURCES_IN_SPEC > > > > > 2. When a client creates a resource without mime type, should > > > the server make a guess or report application/octet-stream? > > > > It could, but I wouldn't recommend that. It may make sense to report a > > *specific* content type (such as application/x-foobar), but reporting > > "application/octet-stream" doesn't really help anybody. > > > > I'm not sure this is workable. You're right that defaulting to > application/octet-stream doesn't help anybody, but it may hurt > less. When a > client creates a resource without a MIME type, then a client asks for the > resource using GET, the server must put some value in the Content-Type > header. Since "getcontenttype" is defined as the type that would be No, it doesn't (as far as I can tell). RFC2616 says that the Content-Type SHOULD be present, but then goes on saying what a recipient is allowed to do when it's absent. So if you PUT without content type, cou can't *expect* that the magically will invent one. > returned in the Content-Type header were the client to do a GET > request, it > must have the same value. > > This isn't a DAV problem only -- any Web server might have the > same problem. Right, that's why RFC2616 is relevant.
Received on Tuesday, 19 February 2002 02:44:07 UTC