W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webapps@w3.org > January to March 2012

Re: (aside) MIME type

From: Hallvord R. M. Steen <hallvord@opera.com>
Date: Sat, 18 Feb 2012 16:25:01 +0100
To: "Anne van Kesteren" <annevk@opera.com>, "Paul Libbrecht" <paul@hoplahup.net>
Cc: "Ryosuke Niwa" <rniwa@webkit.org>, public-webapps@w3.org
Message-ID: <op.v9vrrzrda3v5gv@hr-opera.oslo.osa>
On Sat, 18 Feb 2012 13:47:08 +0100, Paul Libbrecht <paul@hoplahup.net>  
wrote:

>>> WHEN I registered a media-type on the ietf list I have been quite much  
>>> hit as the first comment "one says media-type
>>> nowadays".

Well, on one hand it's probably polite and correct to let the group that  
defines a piece of the puzzle decide a name. On the other hand, I find  
their wish to "rebrand" a long-established vocabulary and concept strange.  
I wonder if they ever considered that at some point, a word stops being a  
Technology as defined by a specific subset of people and becomes simply  
Language, defined by its users collectively. By now, "MIME type" is a part  
of our language..

>> Media type is ambiguous with CSS.
>
> Why?

Just because CSS also defines and uses "media type". Luckily, the human  
mind does some namespace processing which is subconscious and really  
efficient.. ;-)

-- 
Hallvord R. M. Steen, Core Tester, Opera Software
http://www.opera.com http://my.opera.com/hallvors/
Received on Saturday, 18 February 2012 15:24:40 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 26 March 2013 18:49:50 GMT