On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 3:52 PM, Evan Martin <e...@chromium.org> wrote:
> You have two use cases in mind here, and I think your solutions are mixing
> them.
> In the (rare) case where someone has the correct mime type set, we
> should obey the mime type and do no sniffing. I think that's
> non-controversial.
Yes, non-controversial, in that case it is an extension for sure.
> That leaves the "user cannot set the mime type" case. So we're
> getting application/octet-stream or whatever and the question is how
> to upgrade from that to an extension install. It seems to me the
> filename extension is more obvious to a developer than any scary
> heuristic.
>
> Options here (I can't tell if you're suggesting #2 or #3):
> 1) filename extension only (what I'm suggesting)
> 2) require both filename extension and sniffing to match (seems to be
> only minimally different from option #1 -- the delta is cases where
> you have a .crx that is *not* an extension, but you'll also have this
> with corrupt extension files where you ought to have some UI to handle
> it anyway)
> 3) ignore filename, try sniffing out of other app/octet-stream files.
> Seems unpredictable to me.
I was suggesting 2), trying to avoid the case where we mistake some
existing blob on the web that happens to end in .crx as an extension.
- a
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
Chromium Developers mailing list: chromium-dev@googlegroups.com
View archives, change email options, or unsubscribe:
http://groups.google.com/group/chromium-dev
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
