[whatwg] [mimesniff] The X-Content-Type-Options header
julian.reschke at gmx.de
Mon Nov 19 10:17:41 PST 2012
On 2012-11-17 19:17, Adam Barth wrote:
> I would prefer if the spec described what implementations actually do
> rather than your opinion about what they should do. To answer your
> specific questions:
That works well if something is widely supported already. It works less
well if you have one initial and one incomplete implementation only.
> 1) Don't bother dropping the "X-". Everyone who implements this
> feature uses the X- and dropping it is just going to cause unnecessary
> interoperability problems.
There's no *need* to drop it, but if research on this topic leads to the
conclusion that the functionality is needed, but the current X-
prototype isn't sufficient anyway it might be worth considering.
Best regards, Julian
More information about the whatwg