- From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
- Date: Tue, 21 May 2002 20:45:35 -0400
- To: "Ian B. Jacobs" <ij@w3.org>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org
Just my personal response (i.e. not for the XMLP WG) ... In general, this is quite good. The only part I have an objection to is this bit; "It is a serious error for the response body to be inconsistent with the assertions made about it by the MIME headers. Web software SHOULD NOT attempt to recover from such errors by guessing, but SHOULD report the error to the user to allow intelligent corrective action." While this might be technically correct, it is missing a very important piece of information; that the media type may be guessed only in a very specific case. IMO, RFC 2616 section 7.2.1 does a better job at explaining the situation; "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 [...]" Thanks. MB -- Mark Baker, CTO, Idokorro Mobile (formerly Planetfred) Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA. distobj@acm.org http://www.markbaker.ca http://www.idokorro.com
Received on Tuesday, 21 May 2002 20:37:11 UTC