On Thu, 20 May 2010 17:59:42 +0800, Robert O'Callahan
<[email protected]> wrote:
On Thu, May 20, 2010 at 9:55 PM, Robert O'Callahan
<[email protected]>wrote:
I just became aware that application/octet-stream is excluded from
being a
type "the user agent knows it cannot render".
http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#a-type-that-the-user-agent-knows-it-cannot-render
Apparently this was done in response to a bug report:
http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=7977
Neither the bug report nor the editor's response give any indication why
this change was made.
This change means files served with application/octet-stream will make
it
all the way to the step "If the media
data<http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/multipage/video.html#media-data>can
be fetched but is found by inspection to be in an unsupported format
...", so implementations have to add support for binary sniffing for
all the
types they support. We didn't need this before in Gecko. What was the
motivation for adding this implementation requirement?
Hmm. I guess it doesn't add any implementation requirements beyond what
you
need to handle the complete absence of a Content-Type (which we currently
don't handle, but I suppose we should). So this isn't really a problem.
I'd still like to know why application/octet-stream has been added here,
though.
For the record, Opera implements canPlayType("application/octet-stream")
and canPlayType("application/octet-stream; codecs=foo") as per spec
("maybe" and "" respectively), but I don't have any strong opinions about
it.
--
Philip Jägenstedt
Core Developer
Opera Software
