On 18/06/13 17:40, Marcos Caceres wrote:
> I'm not sure I follow? If you have:
>
> {src: "foo", width: "64", height: "64", type: "image/svg"}
>
> The UA assumes that the generated content is going to be "image/svg"?… more
> below.
Yes. But what if the icon might be a bitmap format or a vectorial format
depending on some parameters?
>> In other words, it might
>> quite the same as using extensions.
>>
>> How reliable would the header be?
>>
>
> Given the above:
> 1. User agent that doesn't support SVG can ignore this icon (based on type
> member).
> 2. User agent that support SVG can confidently download this icon for usage:
> - if the author made a mistake and it's not SVG, then the Content-Type header
> is authoritative (e.g., image/png). If the Content-Type header is missing or
> in error - content type sniffing applies.
>
>
> - if the content is unrecognised once downloaded - then it's just ignored.
>
> What am I missing?
Maybe the case above?
--
Mounir
_______________________________________________
dev-webapps mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-webapps
