Re: [tlug] Firefox 3.0.1 doesn't respect <meta http-equiv="content-type">

["Stephen J. Turnbull" <stephen@example.com>]

Curt Sampson writes:
 > On 2008-09-11 10:44 +0900 (Thu), Stephen J. Turnbull wrote:
 > 
 > >  > It is. Try these on for size:
 > >  > 
 > >  >     <meta http-equiv="Content-type" content="image/jpeg" />
 > >  >     <meta http-equiv="Content-encoding" content="gzip" />
 > >  >     <meta http-equiv="Content-length" content="0" />
 > > 
 > > And your point might be?
 > 
 > Semantically, these are nonsense. They can only exist if they are
 > incorrect. Now that's the way to make a specification!

Yup, they're nonsense.  And they would be just as nonsensical if the
server sent them ... which is precisely what happened to me to start
this thread (for a different value of "nonsense").

So what are you saying?  It sounds a lot like "RFC 2616 is broken
because servers can send nonsense in the response headers."  If so,
can you name a spec that isn't broken in that way?