- From: Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>
- Date: Fri, 5 Apr 2002 17:24:35 +0200
- To: "Elliotte Rusty Harold" <elharo@metalab.unc.edu>, <www-tag@w3.org>
> From: www-tag-request@w3.org [mailto:www-tag-request@w3.org]On Behalf Of > Elliotte Rusty Harold > Sent: Friday, April 05, 2002 4:05 PM > To: www-tag@w3.org > Subject: Re: What does a document mean? > > > At 8:45 PM -0800 3/31/02, Tim Bray wrote: > > >>I don't know that I believe that all documents on the Web have > MIME types. > > > >Yes they do. If only application/octet-stream. If they don't > >they're not on the web. > > > > Can you cite the specs that prove that? Maybe it depends on what you > mean by "on the web". I can believe this is true for http/https, but > I'm not nearly as convinced for all other protocols out there. FTP > predates MIME. Do you define "on the web" as "served by http"? Actually, RFC2616, section 7.2.1 says: Any HTTP/1.1 message containing an entity-body SHOULD include a Content-Type header field defining the media type of that body. If and only if the media type is not given by a Content-Type field, the recipient MAY attempt to guess the media type via inspection of its content and/or the name extension(s) of the URI used to identify the resource. If the media type remains unknown, the recipient SHOULD treat it as type "application/octetstream". So it *is* allowed not to have the content-type header, and leaving it out MAY enable the client to do a better guess (the client is allowed to guess if and only if the header is absent, so leaving it out may be desirable!).
Received on Friday, 5 April 2002 10:25:07 UTC