Re: html files not named .html

• Mail folder: WWW Talk Oct 93-present
• Next message: Lou Montulli: "Re: html files not named .html"
• Previous message: Rob McCool: "Re: CERN httpd and libwww 2.14 released"
• Reply: Lou Montulli: "Re: html files not named .html"
• Reply: Aleksandar Totic: "Re: html files not named .html"
• Reply: Tim Berners-Lee: "Re: html files not named .html "

Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Message-id: <199311162130.PAA29310@austin.BSDI.COM>
To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: Re: html files not named .html 
In-Reply-To: Rob McCool's message of Tue, 16 Nov 1993 14:40:29 CST.
Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Reply-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Organization: Berkeley Software Design, Inc.
Date: Tue, 16 Nov 1993 15:30:12 -0600
From: Tony Sanders <sanders@bsdi.com>

Lou Montulli writes:
>  * 1) HTTP/1.0 servers should ALWAYS return a content-type tag!!!!!!!!!
Rob McCool replies:
> This has been fixed in the recent release... it will now return a default
> type.

I don't agree that servers should ALWAYS return a content-type:
because there is a defined default if content-type is missing.
http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/Body.html sez:
    The data (if any) sent with an HTTP request or reply is in a format
    and encoding defined by the object header fields, the default being
    "plain/text" type with "8bit" encoding.
*However*, defensive programming would dictate that you be explicit.

Note that the HTTP/1.0 spec:
    http://info.cern.ch/hypertext/WWW/Protocols/HTTP/HTTP2.html
has changed a bit over the past few months.  Both server and browser
authors should probably re-read it.

--sanders