On Mon, 20 Apr 2009 16:48:26 +0200, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de> wrote: > (1) Work on revising RFC 4329, un-obsoleting "text/javascript" > (realizing that this is what people use in practice anyway), and This makes sense to me. I don't see a particularly strong reason to make <script type=text/javascript> alert(1) </script> non-conforming. > (2) Take the position that the media type referenced in script/@type has > different requirements from content type in HTTP response headers; in > particular, the character set issue goes away as soon as the script is > inlined into HTML. As UAs seem to ignore the type for external script, > it would be possible to recommend application/*script for this case > without breaking anything. The disadvantage for this approach would be > that the spec would need to promote different types depending on how the > script is sent over the wire. I'm pretty sure the type attribute on the script element is always honored. The media type specified by the HTTP Content-Type header is not honored however, though the charset parameter is. (And then there's some mess with the version parameter but I doubt that works when specified on the HTTP Content-Type header and I sort of hope it won't ever.) -- Anne van Kesteren http://annevankesteren.nl/Received on Monday, 20 April 2009 15:11:51 GMT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:40:30 GMT