W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-cdf@w3.org > January 2006

Re: [WICD] comments

From: Mark Baker <distobj@acm.org>
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2006 16:20:55 +1100
Message-ID: <c70bc85d0601302120g4927d92es9de8cfcb4299f32e@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
Cc: public-cdf@w3.org

Hi Bert,

On 1/29/06, Bert Bos <bert@w3.org> wrote:
> 2) 3.1 Identification
> A type like "text/xhtml+xml; profile=WICD" would be easier to
> understand, easier to remember, shorter, would not look like a URL and
> would not need quote marks. A parameter like that would also be
> case-insensitive, like the rest of the MIME type.

Per RFC 3236 (as Anne referenced), the value of the profile parameter
must be a URI, so that's why we used one.

> Also, WICD is a text/* type, not application/*. The most useful fallback
> for a UA is to show it, not to save it to disk. That's why it has a
> charset parameter.

Actually, it's generally agreed in IETF circles that "text/html" was
the incorrect type to use for HTML, which is the reason the former
HTML WG opted for "application/xhtml+xml" for XHTML.  See;


For that reason, and because we want to be able to reuse existing
supported media types, we have decided to stick with

Thanks very much for your interest in our work.

Mark Baker.  Ottawa, Ontario, CANADA.       http://www.markbaker.ca
Received on Tuesday, 31 January 2006 05:21:32 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:02:21 UTC