https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=95421
orcmid <[email protected]> changed: What |Removed |Added ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- CC| |[email protected] --- Comment #7 from orcmid <[email protected]> --- Although the provision of a media-type is a "should," the <manifest:file-entry> manifest:media-type attribute is required by the schema for ODF 1.2 META-INF/manifest.xml. This is apparently the justification for manifest:media-type="", a common practice despite the absence of any such media type. Note that the media type of optional package part "Thumbnails/thumbnail.png" is always known. It is required to be a PNG by the ODF 1.2 specification. I also assume that software (other than an ODF consumer) that makes the thumbnail available probably does not bother with processing META-INF/manifest.xml in order to use it. I heartily agree that "image/png" is preferable to "" but I wonder who will check this on input. It seems that a practical verification of ODF package conformance would need to accept either media-type value when the preview image is present and also require that the thumbnail be a valid PNG as well. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
