Talk:MIME Types and File Extensions: Difference between revisions
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
| Line 3: | Line 3: | ||
Presumedly to distinguish it from "unencapsulated" flac. I'm not sure this makes sense though. Native flac is a fairly light container, and I suspect the current application/x-flac usage is just an analogy with ogg. OTOH, I don't think anyone's done flac over rtp, where this would be needed, but that is something that's interesting. | Presumedly to distinguish it from "unencapsulated" flac. I'm not sure this makes sense though. Native flac is a fairly light container, and I suspect the current application/x-flac usage is just an analogy with ogg. OTOH, I don't think anyone's done flac over rtp, where this would be needed, but that is something that's interesting. | ||
:I don't believe this should be endorsed. Academic thinking instead of pratical thinking moves us away from mainstream success.--[[User:Saoshyant|Ivo]] 10:32, 8 June 2007 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 10:32, 8 June 2007
.flac - application/flac
Why not audio/flac?
Presumedly to distinguish it from "unencapsulated" flac. I'm not sure this makes sense though. Native flac is a fairly light container, and I suspect the current application/x-flac usage is just an analogy with ogg. OTOH, I don't think anyone's done flac over rtp, where this would be needed, but that is something that's interesting.
- I don't believe this should be endorsed. Academic thinking instead of pratical thinking moves us away from mainstream success.--Ivo 10:32, 8 June 2007 (PDT)