Re: imagemagick format detection code

[Stefan Monnier <monnier@iro.umontreal.ca>]

> Or we could explicit and call it :content-type, since that's what it
> is.  But that may lead callers to expect that it (always) be heeded
> instead of treating it as a hint.  Uhm...  :content-type-hint?

I like content-type in the sense that I'd like to see it used as an
intermediate step between file names and major modes.  But I'm not sure
it's the right thing here.

> '(("image/x-icon" "ico"))

For example, here we end up using a non-official content-type because
there's no official content-type for it.

This said, it's probably no worse than hacking up our own
classification, so... yes, I guess it's a good plan.  But please make
them be symbols rather than strings:

 '((image/x-icon . "ico"))

>> We currently have a bit of a mess wrt to use of "format" and "type"
>> since they're both used currently to refer to the same thing, which is
>> not really the type or format of the image but rather something like the
>> rendering library used.
> Yes.  This will add to the general confusion in this area.

We should at least rework the doc to use "type" everywhere, so we can
use :format for the new notion.


        Stefan