Support for RFC 6839 suffix lookup? about mime-types HOT 14 CLOSED

how that different than mime.contentType('zip')? we can strip the +

from mime-types.

lol, I didn't realize they just corresponded to the common file extensions. They technically are registered separately, but yea, I see your point ;0

from mime-types.

Do we still need this or?

from mime-types.

Up to you guys. Those three examples have a suffix that match a file extension, but that does not have to be the case.

from mime-types.

Found in the mime.json: "application/vnd.wv.csp+wbxml" .... what? How are we supposed to know what that is anyways?

Also: "audio/amr-wb+" .. what even... Is this even a valid type?!??

"model/x3d+binary" ... hmm.

"model/x3d+vrml" .. yeah uh, idk how we'd be able to tell what these things are any better than just checking them as a file extension.

from mime-types.

The IANA has a list of them somewhere.

from mime-types.

http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type-structured-suffix/media-type-structured-suffix.xhtml

from mime-types.

@dougwilson what's your plan on this?

from mime-types.

This seems like something to put in mime-db, no? db['application/json'].suffix === 'json'. Then mime-types can implement the reverse, just like it does for file extensions.

from mime-types.

application/json's suffex is not json...

from mime-types.

application/json's suffex is not json...

Huh? Are you following along in the conversation :)? Just check it out in the link I gave above.

from mime-types.

It's also spelled "suffix" from the RFC and the IANA website :)

from mime-types.

hmmm don't see a suffix -> mime type mapping. not sure what the easiest way to do this is

from mime-types.

I'm closing this for some other time in the future for some use, rather than keeping a never-ending issue open :)

from mime-types.