On 07/28/2014 08:01 AM, duanyao wrote:
On 07/28/2014 06:34, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
Sorry for the delay in responding. Your message fell through the
cracks in my e-mail filters.
On 07/17/2014 08:26 AM, duanyao wrote:
Hi,
My first question is about a rule in MIME Sniffing specification
(http
7;ll be happy to update mimesniff to fill it, if that's
determined to be the best course of action.
HTH,
Gordon
[1] http://wiki.whatwg.org/wiki/Contexts
[2] http://mimesniff.spec.whatwg.org/#context-specific-sniffing
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/
uire the behavior it currently requires.
-Boris
I have finally made this change. Please confirm that this is what you
had in mind:
https://github.com/whatwg/mimesniff/commit/d7bafc16ee480a5dea4c27d60dd5272388e022ce
http://mimesniff.spec.whatwg.org/#rules-for-text-or-binary
--
Gordon P. Hemsle
uire the behavior it currently requires.
-Boris
I'm inclined to agree.
Having heard no objection (or, indeed, any discussion whatsoever) in the
last 3 months, I plan to move ahead with this proposed change.
Anyone else have anything to say before I do?
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/
prefix combo would come before the plain hash
which holds the ID.
So, for example:
http://whatwg.gphemsley.org/url_test.php?file=test.zip&spacer=1#/example.html#middle
Then you could also take the opportunity to spec the #! prefix (and
other hash-combo prefixes) that is used by a lot of sites nowadays.
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/
gt; files better [1] and would like to document it and add it to the MIME
> Sniffing
> spec. [2] The disadvantage, though, is that more than 512 bytes
> are required for an accurate detection.
>
> --Peter
>
> [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=862088
> [2]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=879429
>
I'm aware of this. I was told that a proposal would be made in due
course, so I'm waiting on that.
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
pparently [1]). The parameters, especially the "codecs"
> parameter,
> can make a difference in what value is returned by the API.
>
> [1]: https://bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=875385
>
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
On Sat, Jun 1, 2013 at 11:41 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> On Fri, May 31, 2013 at 11:50 PM, Peter Occil wrote:
>> * The word "base64" can only appear at the end of the MIME type, so that a
>> data URL like
>> "data:application/example;base64;foo=bar,AA
s in other
than last place are warnings. (Not sure what the reasoning behind that
distinction is, but that's what reality is.)
So it seems the only issue I have to worry about is what to do with
MIME types which only have parameters.
Regards,
Gordon
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
does not get overridden by the
later appearance of a boolean parameter of the same name.
I think those are the important points of background information you
need to know in order to evaluate this algorithm.
I look forward to your response.
Regards,
Gordon
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
the following would not be well-formed under HTTP or MIME:
>
> text/plain;charset=ut?f-8
> text/plain;charset=utf=8
>
> 4. Quoted parameter values are not checked to ensure that they do not
> contain a 0x7F byte
> or a byte other than TAB (0x09) that is less than 0x20.
>
te what you've proposed here,
but in the meantime: Keep in mind that the Content-Type header is not
the only source for a MIME type. This algorithm needs to consider MIME
types from all possible sources.
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
the parameters
> dictionary.
> 13. Otherwise, run these substeps:
> 1. Let value be the byte string from the current byte up to but
> not including the next 0x20 (SPACE), 0x09 (TAB), or ";" byte. Advance
> pointer to the next 0x20 (SPACE), 0x09 (TAB), or ";" byte.
> 2. If value is empty or contains a byte that isn't a parameter
> value byte, return undefined.
> 3. Add the mapping of parameter to value to the parameters
> dictionary.
>
> ---
>
>
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
7;s much better to define the actual processing so implementers are
> less inclined to take shortcuts when implementing (test suites also
> help, but they're typically written way-after-the-fact).
>
>
>> You should also explain whether another change to make section 9 more
>> readable is
>> appropriate (though it currently is relatively readable as is).
>
>
> I'll leave that to Gordon.
>
>
> --
> http://annevankesteren.nl/
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
ure.
> jpeg = %xFF.D8.FF
>; The JPEG Start of Image marker followed by the indicator
>; byte of another marker.
>
> If the start of the byte sequence doesn't match any ABNF given above, return
> undefined.
>
> ---
>
> I would appreciate comments.
>
> --Peter
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 5/8/13 12:15 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> Perhaps. But maybe I'm not clear on what exactly the alternate
>> proposal is. Are you suggesting not supporting the @download
>> attribute? Or just igno
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 12:01 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 5/8/13 10:45 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> I still think @download takes priority.
>>
>> The Content-Disposition header says, "Nevermind what filename the URL
>> shows; this is really file B.tx
On Wed, May 8, 2013 at 9:43 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 5/8/13 6:53 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> It's not clear to me which of the two factors you take issue with.
>
>
> The question of which filename takes priority.
>
>
>> The second sentence ve
On Tue, May 7, 2013 at 10:18 PM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 5/7/13 5:54 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> A @download attribute with a value would override both factors, like so:
>> (1) Download it.
>> (2) "A.txt"
>
> Why?
>
> You say this as if i
g a different filename is going to meaningfully
> protect downloaded content. So I think a stronger UI warning is needed
> in this scenario.
>
> Firefox currently doesn't support cross-origin @download references,
> so I don't have any meaningful implementation experience to share
> regarding that scenario.
>
> / Jonas
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
s relevant to naming
>> it, and to the content too, of course. Now it is neither a reliable
>> comparison with links the relevant clauses nor an overview - it has too many
>> details, to begin with.
>
>
> It's more intended to be an overview. Can you give an example of something
> that is too detailed and suggest the level of detail that would be more
> appropriate?
>
>
>> Is this for authors who consider moving from HTML 4.01 to HTML 5?
>
>
> Yes.
>
>
>> Then I think it should primarily specify what HTML 4.01 features are
>> forbidden in HTML 5, then the extensions.
>
>
> Thanks, that's useful feedback.
>
>
> --
> Simon Pieters
> Opera Software
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
The document scope [1] explains why it uses "HTML" in the title as
> opposed to HTML5 or HTML(5).
>
> --Xaxio
>
> References:
> [1] http://html-differences.whatwg.org/#scope
>
>
>
> On Fri, May 3, 2013 at 11:16 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley
> wrote:
>>
>
sheet:
>>>
>>> http://html-differences.**whatwg.org/<http://html-differences.whatwg.org/>
>>>
>>
>> I think you should start from making the title sensible. "HTML differences
>> from HTML4" is too esoteric even in this cont
your
>> use case?
>> ...
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> In short, why should the spec suggest any specific method of marking up
>> comments?
>
> Good question, in the case of recommended tomarkup comments
> it seems like it's an element in search of a use case.
>
> For users who consume article semantics it appear to cause issues when
> used for any piece of content ranging from a one sentence comment to
> an article containing thousands of words or an interactive widget.
>
>
> regards
> SteveF
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
if the user agent
has the capability to interpret a resource of that media type and
present it to the user."
http://mimesniff.spec.whatwg.org/#supported-by-the-user-agent
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
more specific:
(1) Safari doesn't appear to prompt the user for any downloads. It
just automatically downloads any file it can't handle.
(2) If you allow Safari to open "safe" files that it downloads, ZIP
appears to be one of them. Gzip and RAR, however, do not.
So this isn't the
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:30 PM, Adam Barth wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 10:30 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley
> wrote:
>> Based on my reading of the source code, it seems that Gecko treats a
>> resource served as 'application/octet-stream' as an unknown type which
>>
To be clear, I'm asking this because I would like to remove the
sniffing of archive types from the mimesniff spec if there aren't any
valid usecases.
On Wed, Nov 28, 2012 at 12:18 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> The mimesniff spec currently includes signatures for ZIP, gzip, and
-stream"
should be treated as if the media type was undefined? Or is this
conversation moot now?
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 3:02 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 11/29/12 2:53 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> At one point it says, "The MIME type "application/octet-stream" with
>> no parameters is never a type that the user agent knows it cannot
>> r
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 2:32 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 11/29/12 2:07 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> So perhaps a more useful question would be what to do in situations
>> like that—should mimesniff treat "application/octet-stream" as a type
>> "
On Thu, Nov 29, 2012 at 1:30 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> Based on my reading of the source code, it seems that Gecko treats a
> resource served as 'application/octet-stream' as an unknown type which
> is sniffed as if no Content-Type was specified.
Oh, wait, I forgot what
sniff-scriptable flag set, should it get its own call, with the
sniff-scriptable flag unset? Are there other options here?
I haven't checked what UAs actually do in practice, but I don't
believe the spec currently allows anything but leaving resources
tagged as 'application/octet-stream
n, 26 Nov 2012 23:38:02 +0100, Gordon P. Hemsley
> wrote:
>
>> Upon looking through the code for Gecko's media sniffing, I noticed
>> that they seem to combine sniffing for audio and video elements. Given
>> that Opera has said that it uses the specific sniffing alg
On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 4:39 AM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 27, 2012 at 12:59 AM, Gordon P. Hemsley
> wrote:
>> Would this be something UAs would prefer to handle in their Ogg
>> library, or should I spec it as part of sniffing?
>
> What would be the use case fo
ing
(perhaps not unsimilar to what is done for MP4 video and what might
have to be done with MP3 files without ID3 tags).
Would this be something UAs would prefer to handle in their Ogg
library, or should I spec it as part of sniffing?
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
er if it would make sense to combine audio and video
sniffing under a single audiovisual category? This would affect the
"matching audio/video type pattern" sections and the "sniffing
audio/video specifically" sections.
Any objections? Other thoughts?
--
Gordon P. Hemsle
cause of best current practice).
Does anyone have any questions, comments, or objections about this issue?
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
ment, and would value opinions
> on the value of a feature of this kind, and the merits of this particular
> approach.
>
>
> https://docs.google.com/document/pub?id=1pw2Bzvy6OEn8YY3fAcZiReJPmgB79swkx-NJAdcemPk
>
> Thanks!
>
> -Dave
>
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
On Mon, Nov 12, 2012 at 6:08 PM, Ian Hickson 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
hat's intended, but I don't know. The selection of
which bytes to sniff predates me, and I don't know what the use cases
are.
> Otherwise, looks good to me.
Thanks for the review!
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
blocking the general
bug here:
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=19746
And if you want to follow the commits as they happen, you can follow
@mimesniff on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/mimesniff
Thanks!
Gordon
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.or
n contact one of the
permanent autoconfirmed users listed here:
http://wiki.whatwg.org/index.php?title=Special:ListUsers&group=autoconfirmed
Happy wikiing!
Gordon
P.S. If you think you should be a permanent autoconfirmed member (and
you're not), ping me on IRC or drop me a lin
ything "too bad" about using
PHP 5.2 or higher with new technology.[1]
Regards,
Gordon
[1] See also: http://gophp5.org/
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
http://sasha.sourceforge.net/ • http://www.yoursasha.com/
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 3:26 AM, Boris Zbarsky wrote:
> On 7/12/10 11:31 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>>
>> The particular use case that prompted me to think about this is
>> including a PDF via . In Firefox (last I checked), one is
>> required to install a separate ad
Nils,
I don't hate the HTTP Content-Type header. In fact, I like it very much.
But this proposal was intended to guide the user agent before they
ever receive the HTTP Content-Type header. ;)
Cheers,
Gordon
On Tue, Jul 13, 2010 at 2:48 AM, Nils Dagsson Moskopp
wrote:
> "Gord
urs. (TIFF files, perhaps? Like on the U.S. Patent Office's
website?)
Now, I'm not a spec implementor by any means, but I am a web author and a
web user, so I've been on both sides of this issue. And it doesn't appear
that it would be too complicated to extend the existing suppo
If so, then it always
> does. The default value for a select element is not an empty string as an
> is always there (unless someone has been stupid enough to create an
> empty select list.)
>
> As such, some sort of value will always be sent.
>
> Thanks,
> Ash
>
Flash. To be honest, I'm
> often annoyed at the way Flash steals the focus of all my key presses making
> it almost impossible to navigate using only the keyboard.
>
> You could use Javascript to put the focus onto an object, capture all the
> key presses on that and return fals
On Tue, Feb 9, 2010 at 10:05 PM, Biju wrote:
> What should a user agent display when html content is...
>
>
> <%@ page language="java" %>
>
>
> At present IE and Safari display blank
>
> Firefox display <%@ page language="java" %>
>
> And for document.body.innerHTML browsers give
> Firefox -->
On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 4:15 PM, Erik Vorhes wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 6, 2009 at 2:52 PM, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
>> I also propose allowing parenthetical citations and footnote markers
>> (as is used in the various W3C/WHATWG specifications) to also be
>> marked up with , t
l
zone that will lead to an amicable resolution of this long debate.
Regards,
Gordon
--
Gordon P. Hemsley
m...@gphemsley.org
http://gphemsley.org/ • http://gphemsley.org/blog/
http://sasha.sourceforge.net/ • http://www.yoursasha.com/
Ah. I was afraid you might say that.
On Tue, Sep 29, 2009 at 6:54 PM, Ian Hickson wrote:
> On Tue, 29 Sep 2009, Gordon P. Hemsley wrote:
> >
> > s/Html/html/
>
> Actually that was intentional in that example. I like to show a variety of
> syntaxes so that people
13031,7 +13031,60 @@
>>
>> +
>> + Here is a graduation programme with two sections, one for the
>> + list of people graduating, and one for the description of the
>> + ceremony.
>> +
>> + <!DOCTPE Html>
>>
>
> s/DOCT
I'd sent this earlier, but it got caught in the message queue that
apparently nobody checks. Let's see if it works this time.
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Gordon P. Hemsley
Date: Tue, Sep 15, 2009 at 11:31 PM
Subject: Re: [whatwg] article/section/details naming/
55 matches
Mail list logo
