[gopher] Re: Item Type Suggestions
Okay, thanks for clearing that up. I thought that you meant that the
mimetype would
be mandatory, but as I now understand it this is not the case. Way to go..
my fears
have vanished. :)
Mark
-----Oorspronkelijk bericht-----
Van: gopher-bounce@complete.org [mailto:gopher-bounce@complete.org] Namens
Cameron Kaiser
Verzonden: dinsdag 22 juli 2008 14:59
Aan: gopher@complete.org
Onderwerp: [gopher] Re: Item Type Suggestions
> > >
gopher://gopher.site.invalid/9(image/tiff)/pictures/venusdekilometro.tif
> >
> > Does this mean that we have to look up the mime-type for each file? What
if
> > you don't know it? Also, wouldn't this make it harder to give links to
other
> > people? I'm not really at peace with these things - mime-types and all
that
> > just aren't my cup of tea.
>
> It would make them longer, yes. However, the idea here is only to use the
> MIME type for ambiguous or unspecified types. A client that is type-aware
only
> uses the MIME type if it's provided, and falls back on the itemtype
otherwise.
> A client that doesn't know about MIME types just sees the 9.
I should also add that specifying the MIME type in this scheme would be
totally optional. You could have a regular menu and for the one troublesome
file in there that does not neatly fit into an existing item type, *then*
you could add a MIME type. And like I say above, it won't break any clients.
Only the server has to know/deal with it.
--
------------------------------------ personal: http://www.cameronkaiser.com/
--
Cameron Kaiser * Floodgap Systems * www.floodgap.com *
ckaiser@floodgap.com
-- "Now you're playing with POWER!"
-------------------------------------------
Reply to: