>>>>> "James" == James Fuller <jim.fuller@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes:

    James> XSLT 1.0 spec states that MIME types text/xml and
    James> application/xml 'should' be used, though there are a few
    James> caveats;

    James> - The spec goes on to say that new media types can 'also'
    James> be used, so things like text/xsl is fine.

    James> - I tend to avoid the mime-type text/xml....as this
    James> conflicts with what various specs say on how to determine
    James> charset (XML and RFC3023)....

    James> - IE (last time I checked) uses text/xsl

    James> - Mozilla is fine with text/xml and application/xml...and
    James> something I didnt know (from Jarno's post) apparantly uses
    James> text/xsl as well

    James> - and |application/xslt+xml is the mime-type as specified
    James> in the XSLT 2.0 draft spec

    James> |clear as mud....from a server perspective I still tend to

I'm looking at it from an XSLT 2.0 implementation perspective. Clearly
I must support application/xslt+xml.

But then there is the question of compatibility with existing
documents. Sincer I support the 1.0 backwards compatibility feature,
it makes sense to also support legacy MIME types.
So i guess I'll accept all those listed above.
-- 
Colin Paul Adams
Preston Lancashire