[whatwg] [mimesniff] Review requested on MIME Sniffing Standard
Ian Hickson
ian at hixie.ch
Mon Nov 12 16:12:53 PST 2012
On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
> > On Mon, 12 Nov 2012, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> >> But if everyone vows to just wait for 512 bytes (or EOF), then that's
> >> fine with me.
> >
> > I don't think we should require tools to wait for 512 bytes. This is
> > an area where if we have the requirement, some user agents are just
> > going to have a timeout anyway and ignore the spec; we gain nothing by
> > making it non-conforming to have a timeout.
>
> I'm inclined to agree with you, but I'm curious what other implementers
> have to say on the issue.
>
> >> > What are the use cases for ‘Sniffing archives specifically’?
> >>
> >> No idea. I only included it for completeness.
> >
> > Please don't spec things for completeness without use cases. :-)
>
> In that case, I need to know which you think you might want for HTML and
> which you know you won't. (I don't know of any other specs reliant on
> mimesniff.)
We definitely need (and are using) the generic sniffer, sniffing for
images specifically, and the rules for text vs binary.
We may one day need a set of rules to sniff for a media resource (e.g.
audio/wave vs video/webm), but whether we'll need this is as yet unclear
(some browser vendors want to sniff, others don't).
CSS might need a font sniffer for @font-face, I don't know.
That's it, as far as I know.
--
Ian Hickson U+1047E )\._.,--....,'``. fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/ U+263A /, _.. \ _\ ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer. `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
More information about the whatwg
mailing list