gzipped images in SIAP 1.0
Norman Gray
norman at astro.gla.ac.uk
Wed May 23 03:46:30 PDT 2007
On 2007 May 23 , at 01.24, Mark Taylor wrote:
> However, ignoring the headers altogether and following Tom's advice
> to look at the magic
> numbers is almost certainly a better idea: more reliable (the
> headers might be wrong) and probably easier.
Myself, I would disagree with this, on public-interest grounds.
If a tool responds to breakage by saying `I know what you mean', then
the service in question is allowed to continue being broken. That
diminishes the utility of the MIME type system, and forces every
other client to guess too. If a tool -- especially a tool with the
ubiquity and authority of Topcat -- simply reports that the service
is broken, and how[1], then the service maintainers will be forced to
fix their broken service, albeit at the cost of some short-term
irritation.
Postel's law is an engineering heuristic, not an architectural
principle.
But I say all this with some diffidence, since I don't myself write
the code at either end of this transaction.
All the best,
Norman
[1] Could it perhaps quote the email address of the service
maintainers, as gleaned from the registry?
--
------------------------------------------------------------------
Norman Gray : http://nxg.me.uk
eurovotech.org : University of Leicester, UK
More information about the dal
mailing list