Re: a WebCGM question

[Dieter@isodraw.de (Dieter Weidenbrueck)]

Lofton,

I also believe that this is part of the MIME type definition. Since there is
no other way from the outside to detect the MIME type than the extension it
must be .cgm.

BTW, the latest version of the BHO (to be released within a week or so) will
allow for specification of additional extensions in a config file. So then
.bin could be handled by the BHO, and it would be up to the plugin to check
whether it is a cgm or not.

Dieter

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lofton Henderson" <lofton@rockynet.com>
To: <cgmopen-members@lists.oasis-open.org>
Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 9:06 PM
Subject: a WebCGM question


> CGM Open Members --
>
> I have a question of interpretation about WebCGM:  Is it required,
> anywhere, that a valid WebCGM instance have the filename extension
> ".cgm"?  It must be binary encoded, but could it for example be validly
> named myCGM.bin?
>
> I don't find any such statement in the REC-WebCGM text (correct me if I'm
> wrong).  However, I do think it is a part of the MIME type
> definition.  Does this latter translate into an actual, testable
> requirement for WebCGM instances?
>
> Regards,
> -Lofton.
>
> *******************
> Lofton Henderson
> 1919 Fourteenth St., #604
> Boulder, CO   80302
>
> Phone:  303-449-8728
> Email:  lofton@rockynet.com
> *******************
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this elist send a message with the single word
> "unsubscribe" in the body to: cgmopen-members-request@lists.oasis-open.org