[html5] r1926 - [] (0) make <embed> do extension sniffing, for compatibility with servers that s [...]

[whatwg at whatwg.org]

Author: ianh
Date: 2008-07-23 19:28:52 -0700 (Wed, 23 Jul 2008)
New Revision: 1926

Modified:
   index
   source
Log:
[] (0) make <embed> do extension sniffing, for compatibility with servers that send flash as text/plain, sigh. See Mozilla bug 347736. (credit: cb)

Modified: index
===================================================================
--- index	2008-07-24 02:02:11 UTC (rev 1925)
+++ index	2008-07-24 02:28:52 UTC (rev 1926)
@@ -16459,17 +16459,37 @@
    being embedded is defined as follows:
 
   <ol>
-   <li>If the element has a <code title=attr-embed-type><a
-    href="#type4">type</a></code> attribute, then the value of the <code
-    title=attr-embed-type><a href="#type4">type</a></code> attribute is the
-    <span>content's type</span>.
+   <li>
+    <p>If the element has a <code title=attr-embed-type><a
+     href="#type4">type</a></code> attribute, then the value of the <code
+     title=attr-embed-type><a href="#type4">type</a></code> attribute is the
+     <span>content's type</span>.
 
-   <li>Otherwise, if the specified resource has <a href="#content-type5"
-    title=Content-Type>explicit Content-Type metadata</a>, then that is the
-    <span>content's type</span>.
+   <li>
+    <p>Otherwise, if the <a href="#ltpathgt" title=url-path><path></a>
+     component of the <a href="#url">URL</a> of the specified resource <!--
+    XXX before or after redirects? -->
+     matches a pattern that a <a href="#plugin">plugin</a> supports, then the
+     <span>content's type</span> is the type that that plugin can handle.</p>
 
-   <li>Otherwise, the content has no type and there can be no appropriate <a
-    href="#plugin">plugin</a> for it.
+    <p class=example>For example, a plugin might say that it can handle
+     resources with <a href="#ltpathgt" title=url-path><path></a>
+     components that end with the four character string "<code
+     title="">.swf</code>".</p>
+
+    <p class=big-issue>It would be better if browsers didn't do extension
+     sniffing like this, and only based their decision on the actual contents
+     of the resource. Couldn't we just apply the <span>sniffed type of a
+     resource</span> steps?</p>
+
+   <li>
+    <p>Otherwise, if the specified resource has <a href="#content-type5"
+     title=Content-Type>explicit Content-Type metadata</a>, then that is the
+     <span>content's type</span>.
+
+   <li>
+    <p>Otherwise, the content has no type and there can be no appropriate <a
+     href="#plugin">plugin</a> for it.
   </ol>
 
   <p>Whether the resource is fetched successfully or not must be ignored when

Modified: source
===================================================================
--- source	2008-07-24 02:02:11 UTC (rev 1925)
+++ source	2008-07-24 02:28:52 UTC (rev 1926)
@@ -14111,17 +14111,37 @@
 
   <ol>
 
-   <li>If the element has a <code title="attr-embed-type">type</code>
-   attribute, then the value of the <code
-   title="attr-embed-type">type</code> attribute is the
-   <span>content's type</span>.</li>
+   <li><p>If the element has a <code
+   title="attr-embed-type">type</code> attribute, then the value of
+   the <code title="attr-embed-type">type</code> attribute is the
+   <span>content's type</span>.</p></li>
 
-   <li>Otherwise, if the specified resource has <span
+   <li>
+
+    <p>Otherwise, if the <span title="url-path"><path></span>
+    component of the <span>URL</span> of the specified resource <!--
+    XXX before or after redirects? --> matches a pattern that a
+    <span>plugin</span> supports, then the <span>content's type</span>
+    is the type that that plugin can handle.</p>
+
+    <p class="example">For example, a plugin might say that it can
+    handle resources with <span title="url-path"><path></span>
+    components that end with the four character string "<code
+    title="">.swf</code>".</p>
+
+    <p class="big-issue">It would be better if browsers didn't do
+    extension sniffing like this, and only based their decision on the
+    actual contents of the resource. Couldn't we just apply the
+    <span>sniffed type of a resource</span> steps?</p>
+
+   </li>
+
+   <li><p>Otherwise, if the specified resource has <span
    title="Content-Type">explicit Content-Type metadata</span>, then
-   that is the <span>content's type</span>.</li>
+   that is the <span>content's type</span>.</p></li>
 
-   <li>Otherwise, the content has no type and there can be no
-   appropriate <span>plugin</span> for it.</li>
+   <li><p>Otherwise, the content has no type and there can be no
+   appropriate <span>plugin</span> for it.</p></li>
 
   </ol>