W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > October to December 2008

Re: [widgets] Content-type sniffing and file extension to MIME mapping

From: Marcos Caceres <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 10 Dec 2008 10:53:47 +0000
Message-ID: <b21a10670812100253w4bc852d4r80f2264420a8884f@mail.gmail.com>
To: laurens@grauw.nl
Cc: "Jonas Sicking" <jonas@sicking.cc>, "Simon Pieters" <simonp@opera.com>, public-webapps <public-webapps@w3.org>

2008/12/10 Laurens Holst <lholst@students.cs.uu.nl>:
> Marcos Caceres schreef:
>>
>> Seems that there is still too much incompatibility to suggest
>> "application/xml" support across Widget user agents. I think we should
>> just stick with text/html. If authors want to use "application/xml",
>> then they can use <content src="somefile" type="application/xml" />
>> and hope for the best :)
>
> XHTML is a W3C standard that's been Recommended status for many years and
> has plenty of implementations (except for Internet Explorer, at this time).
> This should be more than enough to warrant inclusion in the list of MIME
> type mappings.
>
> I'm against using the application/xml type for XHTML by the way. A more
> specific MIME type is available and it has its use in certain occasions
> (e.g. for content negotiation, to determine whether the UA is requesting a
> human-readable XHTML  version or a site-specific machine-readable XML
> version). XML is a transmission format that a lot of different formats make
> use of, however each format using XML is still a format on its own and
> should have its own MIME type. E.g. application/xhtml+xml should not be
> confused with application/rdf+xml, even though both could be served as
> application/xml.
>

The content element is defined here:

http://dev.w3.org/2006/waf/widgets/#the-content

I'm not sure if any widget engines support application/xhtml+xml. I
think just adding it because it's a rec is not a valid argument. As
Hixie argued, it may be supported by some UA's but it's not well
understood by developers [1]. Implementation of HTML5 is well underway
in many browsers, which supersedes XHTML in lots of ways. I think just
mandating support for text/html is sufficient for widgets. Adding
application/xhtml+xml just adds more baggage to widgets and no
implementer has requested its support.

However, if implementers request it, then we will consider adding it.

Kind regards,
Marcos
[1] http://hixie.ch/advocacy/xhtml.

-- 
Marcos Caceres
http://datadriven.com.au
Received on Wednesday, 10 December 2008 10:54:29 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:28 GMT