View Single Post
Old 09-15-2009, 02:35 AM   #7
krischik
Addict
krischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheesekrischik can extract oil from cheese
 
krischik's Avatar
 
Posts: 334
Karma: 1234
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Hindelbank, Switzerland
Device: P990i, PRS 505
Exclamation

Quote:
Originally Posted by Elsi View Post
I would venture a guess that the server did not include a proper mime-type header on the http transmission of the file. That leaves it to the browser/agent to determine the file type. Some simply use the file suffix and trust the "well-known" names to indicate the file type. Others will inspect the file's contents and make a decision from that. Some are arrogant & will override the mime-type header even when it is present.
Actually I think it's more complicated:

First and foremost the webside developer forgot the provide the mime-type. On modern system they can - for example - be attached to the extended attributes and Apache can be told to read the EA's to determine the correct type.

Without the type being provided in the EA'a Apache starts guesswork. First he extension ebub comes up which nothing then Apache would try /etc/mime-magic which comes up with "application/zip" - which is send to the bowser.

Now IE - being a smart arse (like most Microsoft products) and always trying to protect us from problems (which we would not have without Microsoft) renames the file.

Martin

Last edited by krischik; 09-15-2009 at 02:41 AM. Reason: spelling
krischik is offline   Reply With Quote