Browse files

[e] (0) apply wg decision

Fixing http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=10202

git-svn-id: http://svn.whatwg.org/webapps@5994 340c8d12-0b0e-0410-8428-c7bf67bfef74
  • Loading branch information...
1 parent b083760 commit 5fa120b39e5ea1ea6f5175d4c1f9ad5568c971aa @Hixie Hixie committed Apr 12, 2011
Showing with 69 additions and 21 deletions.
  1. +22 −7 complete.html
  2. +22 −7 index
  3. +25 −7 source
View
29 complete.html
@@ -25988,13 +25988,28 @@ <h5 id=mime-types><span class=secno>4.8.10.3 </span>MIME types</h5>
when it is used to label a potential <a href=#media-resource>media
resource</a>.</p>
- <p class=note>In the absence of a <!-- pretty crazy -->
- specification to the contrary, the <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a>
- "<code>application/octet-stream</code>" when used <em>with</em>
- parameters, e.g.
- "<code>application/octet-stream;codecs=theora</code>", <em>is</em>
- <a href=#a-type-that-the-user-agent-knows-it-cannot-render>a type that the user agent knows it cannot render</a>,
- since that parameter is not defined for that type.</p>
+ <p class=note>
+
+ Only the <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a> <!-- the WG decision started with the next bit, which is not in the style of the spec -->
+
+ "<code>application/octet-stream</code>"
+
+ with no parameters
+
+ is special-cased here; if any parameter appears with it, it
+
+ will <!-- the WG decision that led to this text had a "should", but this is a non-normative section -->
+ be treated just like any other <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a>.
+
+ This is a deviation from the rule <!-- in RFC 2046, section 1,
+ paragraph 3 --> that unknown <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a> parameters
+ should be ignored.
+
+ <!-- but not really a "willful violation" since it's not that the
+ types are not being ignored, just that before the type is handled as
+ a type, there's a special case for a particular set of strings -->
+
+ </p>
<dl class=domintro><dt><var title="">media</var> . <code title=dom-navigator-canPlayType><a href=#dom-navigator-canplaytype>canPlayType</a></code>(<var title="">type</var>)</dt>
View
29 index
@@ -25976,13 +25976,28 @@ interface <dfn id=htmlaudioelement>HTMLAudioElement</dfn> : <a href=#htmlmediael
when it is used to label a potential <a href=#media-resource>media
resource</a>.</p>
- <p class=note>In the absence of a <!-- pretty crazy -->
- specification to the contrary, the <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a>
- "<code>application/octet-stream</code>" when used <em>with</em>
- parameters, e.g.
- "<code>application/octet-stream;codecs=theora</code>", <em>is</em>
- <a href=#a-type-that-the-user-agent-knows-it-cannot-render>a type that the user agent knows it cannot render</a>,
- since that parameter is not defined for that type.</p>
+ <p class=note>
+
+ Only the <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a> <!-- the WG decision started with the next bit, which is not in the style of the spec -->
+
+ "<code>application/octet-stream</code>"
+
+ with no parameters
+
+ is special-cased here; if any parameter appears with it, it
+
+ will <!-- the WG decision that led to this text had a "should", but this is a non-normative section -->
+ be treated just like any other <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a>.
+
+ This is a deviation from the rule <!-- in RFC 2046, section 1,
+ paragraph 3 --> that unknown <a href=#mime-type>MIME type</a> parameters
+ should be ignored.
+
+ <!-- but not really a "willful violation" since it's not that the
+ types are not being ignored, just that before the type is handled as
+ a type, there's a special case for a particular set of strings -->
+
+ </p>
<dl class=domintro><dt><var title="">media</var> . <code title=dom-navigator-canPlayType><a href=#dom-navigator-canplaytype>canPlayType</a></code>(<var title="">type</var>)</dt>
View
32 source
@@ -27968,13 +27968,31 @@ interface <dfn>HTMLAudioElement</dfn> : <span>HTMLMediaElement</span> {};</pre>
when it is used to label a potential <span>media
resource</span>.</p>
- <p class="note">In the absence of a <!-- pretty crazy -->
- specification to the contrary, the <span>MIME type</span>
- "<code>application/octet-stream</code>" when used <em>with</em>
- parameters, e.g.
- "<code>application/octet-stream;codecs=theora</code>", <em>is</em>
- <span>a type that the user agent knows it cannot render</span>,
- since that parameter is not defined for that type.</p>
+ <p class="note">
+ <!--END w3c-html-->
+ Only the <span>MIME type</span> <!-- the WG decision started with the next bit, which is not in the style of the spec -->
+ <!--START w3c-html-->
+ "<code>application/octet-stream</code>"
+ <!--END w3c-html-->
+ with no parameters
+ <!--START w3c-html-->
+ is special-cased here; if any parameter appears with it, it
+ <!--END w3c-html-->
+ will <!-- the WG decision that led to this text had a "should", but this is a non-normative section -->
+ <!--START w3c-html--><!--END html--><!--END complete--><!--END epub--><!--END dev-html-->
+ should
+ <!--START html--><!--START complete--><!--START epub--><!--START dev-html-->
+ be treated just like any other <span>MIME type</span>.
+
+ This is a deviation from the rule <!-- in RFC 2046, section 1,
+ paragraph 3 --> that unknown <span>MIME type</span> parameters
+ should be ignored.
+
+ <!-- but not really a "willful violation" since it's not that the
+ types are not being ignored, just that before the type is handled as
+ a type, there's a special case for a particular set of strings -->
+
+ </p>
<dl class="domintro">

0 comments on commit 5fa120b

Please sign in to comment.