[whatwg] Appcache feedback (various threads)
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Jan 31 15:46:51 PST 2011
On Mon, 31 Jan 2011, Glenn Maynard wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 31, 2011 at 6:28 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Fri, 13 Aug 2010, David John Burrowes wrote:
> > >
> > > I can understand wanting to do things right, in terms of using
> > > Content-Type for the file. I can also attest that it can be a royal
> > > pain to diagnose when this is set wrong. I wonder it it would make
> > > sense to have a recommended file extension for the manifest (e.g.
> > > "cachemanifest" so "myapp.cachemanifest"). (maybe "manifest" is a
> > > fine extension, as implied in the spec. It seems a bit generic of a
> > > name to me, though). This way, web server developers could add this
> > > into their default configurations.
> > The spec's text/cache-manifest registration suggests "manifest".
> That's far too generic for servers to default to mapping *.manifest to
> text/cache-manifest. For example, Windows uses *.manifest for SxS
> assembly manifests.
Do they have a MIME type? If not, it doesn't much matter.
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg