That could be the case with any URL, whether the file extension is present or not, or whether the mime-type is correct or not.
-Josh On 3/17/06, Pete Prodoehl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Michael Sullivan wrote: > > let's just call it a pet peeve of mine. > > i'm not going to try and convince anyone to structure their urls in a > > specific way, but I have stated my preference which I think offers more > > clarity and logic without cryptic format that is more complicated to > > decipher (as you cant just look at the link and know the filename). > > You can look at the URL, and *think* you know the file type... > > What's to prevent: > > http://example.com/?name=foo&type=mov > > From being something else, like say, an .exe file perhaps? > > Pete > > -- > http://tinkernet.org/ > videoblog for the future... > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links > > > > > > > Yahoo! Groups Links <*> To visit your group on the web, go to: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/videoblogging/ <*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] <*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to: http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
