Re: [Netsurf-develop] How to handle lying file extensions?

[Rob K. <rj...@ne...>]

Darren Salt wrote:
>  
> I demand that James Bursa may or may not have written...
> 
>> On Saturday 21 April 2007 12:15, Darren Salt wrote:
>>> FWIW, this would be fine were its MIME type reported as image/gif;
>>> however, assuming for a moment that this is so, the browser would still
>>> need to cope with the misnaming in a locally-saved copy
> 
>> The file would get saved with filetype GIF, and NetSurf uses the filetype
>> when loading local files, so it would still work. The name isn't
>> considered.
> 
> Which is all well and good, unless you have no filetype information. Consider
> Netsurf on Linux.

IME, modern UNIX applications pretty much entirely disregard the exact
contents of extensions, as they're more a convention than a standard.

For example, under GNOME, Nautilus correctly thumbnails image files
regardless of extension (assuming the extension at least signifies that
it's a graphic file.)  Similar goes for GIMP loading them.

So it appears the UNIX world these days simply uses the extension to
define content category, not content format.  I can live with this.

B.