RESOLVED FIXED Bug 113272
[BlackBerry] Populate the mime type of the WebContext for images 
https://bugs.webkit.org/show_bug.cgi?id=113272
Summary [BlackBerry] Populate the mime type of the WebContext for images
Arvid Nilsson
Reported 2013-03-25 21:13:25 PDT
PR 278967
Attachments
Patch (2.72 KB, patch)
2013-03-25 21:20 PDT, Arvid Nilsson 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Patch (3.35 KB, patch)
2013-03-26 11:24 PDT, Arvid Nilsson 		no flags
DetailsFormatted DiffDiff
Show Obsolete (1) View All Add attachment proposed patch, testcase, etc.
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 1 2013-03-25 21:20:52 PDT
Created attachment 194994 [details] Patch
George Staikos
Comment 2 2013-03-26 07:30:29 PDT
Comment on attachment 194994 [details] Patch This looks really hacky. Is this the best way to achieve this result?
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 3 2013-03-26 07:32:19 PDT
(In reply to comment #2) > (From update of attachment 194994 [details]) > This looks really hacky. Is this the best way to achieve this result? My thinking is that this is better than using the one in ResourceResponse, because the server could be misconfigured and report broken or no mime type.
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 4 2013-03-26 07:32:59 PDT
So even though context.setMimetype(cachedImage->response().mimeType()) is a lot less code, I'm worried it's less reliable.
George Staikos
Comment 5 2013-03-26 07:58:38 PDT
(In reply to comment #3) > (In reply to comment #2) > > (From update of attachment 194994 [details] [details]) > > This looks really hacky. Is this the best way to achieve this result? > > My thinking is that this is better than using the one in ResourceResponse, because the server could be misconfigured and report broken or no mime type. Shouldn't we take the server-issued one if it is issued, and if not, then try to put our own in?
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 6 2013-03-26 11:08:32 PDT
(In reply to comment #5) > (In reply to comment #3) > > (In reply to comment #2) > > > (From update of attachment 194994 [details] [details] [details]) > > > This looks really hacky. Is this the best way to achieve this result? > > > > My thinking is that this is better than using the one in ResourceResponse, because the server could be misconfigured and report broken or no mime type. > > Shouldn't we take the server-issued one if it is issued, and if not, then try to put our own in? I had it that way originally, let me put it back in =)
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 7 2013-03-26 11:24:42 PDT
Created attachment 195125 [details] Patch
Arvid Nilsson
Comment 8 2013-03-27 05:42:04 PDT
Comment on attachment 195125 [details] Patch Thanks, George =)
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 9 2013-03-27 17:01:14 PDT
Comment on attachment 195125 [details] Patch Clearing flags on attachment: 195125 Committed r147024: <http://trac.webkit.org/changeset/147024>
WebKit Review Bot
Comment 10 2013-03-27 17:01:18 PDT
All reviewed patches have been landed. Closing bug.
Note You need to log in before you can comment on or make changes to this bug.