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

Re: XBL media type?

From: Mark Birbeck <mark.birbeck@x-port.net>
Date: Thu, 7 Sep 2006 20:13:53 +0100
Message-ID: <640dd5060609071213g7bdf00d0p7383a26cb27c6854@mail.gmail.com>
To: public-appformats@w3.org


You wrote in response to Anne:
> Which severely limits evolvability.  Are you sure there won't ever be
> a competitor to XBL that the industry might want to migrate to?
> See;
> http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/doc/mime-respect.html#external

I very much agree with you. Also, the change you describe might not
just happen along the time axis, but one URL might even return
different bindings based on content negotiation.

A MIME type would also be useful for the Accept header, to indicate
what binding languages are supported by some UA.

However, none of that detracts from Mark Nottingham's point (there are
a lot of Marks here!) that this is surely an issue for the TAG.
Certainly you would think that if there is a document type that is
significant in its own right (i.e., is more than 'mere' XML) and for
which there may be alternatives, a MIME type is pretty important.



Mark Birbeck
x-port.net Ltd.

e: Mark.Birbeck@x-port.net
t: +44 (0) 20 7689 9232
w: http://www.formsPlayer.com/
b: http://internet-apps.blogspot.com/

Download our XForms processor from
Received on Thursday, 7 September 2006 19:14:33 UTC

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