[whatwg] Video with MIME type application/octet-stream

Nils Dagsson Moskopp nils-dagsson-moskopp at dieweltistgarnichtso.net
Mon Sep 13 06:55:03 PDT 2010

Mikko Rantalainen <mikko.rantalainen at peda.net> schrieb am Mon, 13 Sep
2010 16:03:27 +0300:

> Basically, this sounds like all the issues of BOM for all binary
> files.
> And why do we need this? Because web servers are not behaving
> correctly and are sending incorrect Content-Type headers? What makes
> you believe that BINID will not be incorrectly used?
> (If you really believe that you can force content authors to provide
> correct BINIDs, why you cannot force content authors to provide
> correct Content-Types? Hopefully the goal is not to sniff if BINIDs
> seems okay and ignore "clearly incorrect" ones in the future...)

This. BINID may be a well-intended idea, but would be an essentially
useless additional layer of abstraction that provides no more
safeguards against misuse than the Content-Type header.

The latter also required no changes to current binary file handling —
which for BINID would need to be universally updated in every
conceivable device that could ever get a BINID file.

Nils Dagsson Moskopp // erlehmann
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 230 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.whatwg.org/pipermail/whatwg-whatwg.org/attachments/20100913/84be7e0a/attachment-0002.pgp>

More information about the whatwg mailing list