Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Simon, It's not that its otherwise a bad idea (it is an excellent idea). the problem is that adding a top level MIME type requires changes to tons of MIME aware code. This is why I always use text/xml as opposed to application/xml because the "application" top level is quite frequently used to denote 8 bit character data or binary data types which need to be base64 encoded for SMTP transport whereas "text" data is 7bit (UNICODE aside :-) and is appropriately transfered as content-type: 7bit or quoted-printable. On the other hand, my MIME code takes special care when it sees the text/xml content-type (not that this should sway the IETF :-)) not that these assumptions are valid, its just that they exist. Jonathan Borden http://jabr.ne.mediaone.net > > Of course plain text will still survive; I'm hardly proposing abolishing > text or application as top-level types. I'm just saying that XML is a > top-level type itself. > > Your arbitrary level proposal is quite reasonable, though I suspect that > that would require considerably more development (through the full IETF > process) than just adding a new top-level type. > > Intriguing possibility, though... > > xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
