RE: Media types

Ok, I change my vote to +1 for application/xml.  That's probably just as well, because I'm sure
you would not want to read me calling yet again for reserving the meaning of @base @lang @href, @src, @rel @type @hreflang
in a micro xml media type registration.

Although that brings up the point of how are applications of micro xml expected to declare their base URI and language?
Maybe that should be an additional goal of the XML Hypermedia CG - to identify how hypermedia formats based on microxml will work.

Peter

________________________________
From: Stephen D Green [mailto:stephengreenubl@gmail.com]
Sent: September 13, 2012 03:06
To: Uche Ogbuji
Cc: public-microxml@w3.org
Subject: Re: Media types


On 12 September 2012 22:49, Uche Ogbuji <uche@ogbuji.net<mailto:uche@ogbuji.net>> wrote:
...There is nothing wrong with the *user* choosing to just use application/xml for now, to suit present-day processors, because it would be technically correct.  The microxml forms of media type would be one for the future no matter how you slice it....


+1
----
Stephen D Green