[CHANGE] audio/vnd.wave is deprecated? I think not

[luckv]

I see on the website that audio/vnd.wave is deprecated and should be used audio/wav instead. (https://mimetype.io/audio/vnd.wave)

I didn't find any information in the internet when and why that mimetype was deprecated, neither I found any information explaining that audio/wav is the official mimetype.

Instead I found comments that said that audio/vnd.wave is the official mime type for wav files.
I found an RFC, RFC 2361.
The comments I found:

• https://stackoverflow.com/a/44827990/17387447
• Fix MIME type for .wav and .avi sindresorhus/file-type#150 (comment)
• .wav files show up as "audio/x-wav" instead of "audio/wav" jshttp/mime-db#22 (comment)

In compensation, neither mdn web docs, or IANA report audio/vnd.wave as a mimetype for wav files. IANA didn't report a mimetype for wav files at all.

• MDN web docs
• IANA audio media types

So, if you have reasons to say that audio/vnd.wave is deprecated, should be explained more in detail why, because there is so little information in the internet about this thing, and this beautiful site is the first result I found when searching '.wav official mime type' in google.
Instead, if I was right, should be removed that banner. I can do a pull request if it's the right thing to do.

[patrickmccallum]

You're 100% right, looks like the "official" mimetype is audio/vnd.wave from what I can see too.

The mimedata.json file auto flags alternatives as "deprecated", which is something that obviously should be fixed. #3 I think it's mentioned in this issue already. I'll go add a new array such as "preferred" with a more appropriate banner text if you think that would be a good solution.

Thanks for bringing it up.

[luckv]

Fantastic, I appreciate your work on this project.

I want to share with you and this project what I have experienced in these days with this mime type.

I'm working on a backend project that uses a library to check the correct mime type of binary files to be then previewed in browsers. That library returns the format audio/vnd.wave for wav files. Despite that being the 'official' and correct mime type, all browsers I tested that mime type with (Chrome, Firefox and Safari) can't preview using the <audio> tag. But if I change the mime type to audio/wav, then the preview works, in all browsers....

Not much surprised because this behaviour complies with MDN web docs.

So my final consideration is that all browser vendors decided to not support audio/vnd.wave mime type, but instead they all support audio/wav. And also when I upload a .wav file on your site, the displayed mime type is that... I suppose because there is an internal api of the browser that return the mime type, or maybe you check the magic numbers of the file with an external library. Anyway, it's all coherent. Starting all from MDN web docs, the 'RFCs wiki' for web developers.

My question is, have all the browsers vendors made the audio/wav the de-facto officially supported mime type? Why MDN web docs and the vendors decided this and they have gone against an RFC, even if so old that is from 1998?

At the end I found the answer to my question, because that RFC is informational, reporting the exact words:

does not represent an Internet community consensus or recommendation

[patrickmccallum]

Thanks @luckv I'll add something to the page about this and also to the links of the page. Was just about to publish the new version of the mimedata with the changes but I'll also build in a "Popular implementation differs from specification" flag/notice.

[luckv]

@patrickmccallum maybe you can add a link to an RFC if present. I don't if it's possible, but would be useful if near the RFC label there will be the RFC status, that like in this case is informational.

[patrickmccallum]

@luckv Sounds good. You can see the changes so far here: https://mimetype.io/audio/vnd.wav

Let me know if that's more clarifying than what we had before!

[luckv]

Seems perfect for me!

[patrickmccallum]

Awesome! Thanks for the issue, big improvement from this one :)