On Wed, Feb 19, 2020 at 2:10 PM Dale Harvey <dhar...@mozilla.com> wrote:

> > If you _do_ invent a new one shared with other browser vendors, please
> > don't use an "x-" prefix in anything new.
>
> Thanks, I got notice of others concerns about this as well and have been
> looped in to discuss this more with standards before shipping. Once we have
> something agreeable will make sure to update this thread.
>

If the file format is a Gecko-specific standard add-on .xpi (of a specific
type) then it's not going to be supported by other browsers (each browser
has their own signature requirements even though all Web Extensions are
basically ZIP archives). Since it is the same file format and extension you
might as well use the historical "application/x-xpinstall" we use for
add-ons. It's not making the "X-" Content-Type problem any worse, and for
sites that already have a type mapping for .xpi (granted, not many) they
won't have to jump through hoops setting up a different one for use
depending on where it's served. If you do use a different Content-Type then
you should probably use something other than .xpi for the file extension,
even if it's the same inside.

-Dan Veditz
_______________________________________________
dev-platform mailing list
dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform

Reply via email to