On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 10:00 AM, Peter Eckersley <[email protected]> wrote:
> Sounds like we have emerging consensus around this version of 3b. Does > anyone know of anything it breaks? > > On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 05:51:55PM +0100, Niklas Keller wrote: > > +1 for .txt, there are servers configured to serve only specific file > > extensions. > > > > Regards, Niklas > > > _ So, the original 3b was "3b, drop the Content-Type restriction but allow file extensions." That would allow both text/plain (with a suffix of .txt if desired) and the original application/jose+json (with an appropriate suffix if desired). Everyone seems to be +1'ing .txt, though, which would be "Switch content type to text/plain, marked with a suffix as well as a content/type". Is there anyone arguing for a different content type than text/plain at this point? regards, Ted > ______________________________________________ > > Acme mailing list > > [email protected] > > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme > > > -- > Peter Eckersley [email protected] > Chief Computer Scientist Tel +1 415 436 9333 x131 > Electronic Frontier Foundation Fax +1 415 436 9993 > > _______________________________________________ > Acme mailing list > [email protected] > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme >
_______________________________________________ Acme mailing list [email protected] https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/acme
