Nicolas Alvarez skrev, Den 2009-07-29 04:07: > Peter Poeml wrote: > >> I can imagine that it could be useful, because mirror servers (in a >> cooperative mirror network) are often delivering stuff with differing >> mime types. On the other hand, a metalink client would benefit from it >> only if it actually does anything with the downlaoded content, which >> might not often be the case. If there is an actual use case, it might >> be helpful to judge. Anyone knows where, how and why this was used in >> the past? >> > > If a client downloads the file referred by <file>, then it already knows the > mime type (Content-Type header in the download), so <mimetype> could only > be useful to clients that don't do any actual download, like search > engines. > Clients may download the file without using HTTP. In that case it would be useful (ie if the client actually needs to know the mimetype).
--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Metalink Discussion" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/metalink-discussion?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
