W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-appformats@w3.org > August 2006

Re: XBL media type?

From: Henri Sivonen <hsivonen@iki.fi>
Date: Thu, 24 Aug 2006 14:00:33 +0300
Message-Id: <2EDF3C15-1E54-45F2-BBAE-FF186EED2264@iki.fi>
To: public-appformats@w3.org

On Aug 24, 2006, at 13:35, Robin Berjon wrote:

> On Aug 23, 2006, at 23:34, Henri Sivonen wrote:
>> On Aug 23, 2006, at 21:32, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> Media types tend to be used for purposes that you aren't planning  
>>> for right now...
>> Surely in order to reap any useful network effects from an  
>> installed base the MIME type needs to be widely deployed. New MIME  
>> types are hard for average authors to deploy (because usually the  
>> author is not in charge of the server config). Moreover, if there  
>> are no immediate must-have benefits today, there's no incentive  
>> for people out there to deploy a new MIME type.
> Registered media types with corresponding file extensions tend to  
> make it into Apache (and other servers) pretty fast. Since people  
> do tend to upgrade those, new types tend to actually spread a lot  
> faster than many expect.

Do people really overwrite their config files with the new defaults  
when their overwrite their httpd binary?

Henri Sivonen
Received on Thursday, 24 August 2006 11:00:49 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:50:05 UTC