W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > December 2006

[whatwg] Sanctity of MIME types

From: Sam Ruby <rubys@intertwingly.net>
Date: Mon, 04 Dec 2006 15:59:39 -0500
Message-ID: <45748C3B.7060707@intertwingly.net>
Here's a random half dozen examples, picked to show a bit of diversity:

   http://beta.versiontracker.com/mac/osx/home-edu/updates.rss
   http://city.piao.com.cn/rss.asp?85
   http://feuerwehr-melle-de.server13031.isdg.de/index.php?id=199
   http://hesten.innit.no/hru/rss.php?START=0&STOP=3
   http://httablo.hu/pages/rss.php
   http://skopjeclubbing.com.mk/rss_djart.asp

Independent of what the specs say *MUST* happen, I'd like people to 
bring up one or more browsers with a URL from this list, and see if the 
browser asked them if they wanted to subscribe.  Subscribe is not a 
normal feature associated with text/html, which is the Content-Type that 
  you will find for each.

The point is not to label these guys bozos (as I said in previous 
messages, bozos outnumber you).  But to get you to consider what 
browsers can, and will, do.

In these days of GreaseMonkey and its brethren, the client is king.

  - - -

Where does this leave HTML5?  I am of the opinion that HTML5 should 
describe a set of rules that a compliant HTML5 parser should follow. 
The MIME and DOCTYPEs specified in the document should be 
recommendations.  Something outside of the parser may chose to dispatch 
based on this information, but that's outside of the control of the 
parser.  IMHO, the parser itself shouldn't complain when it finds a 
HTML4 DOCTYPE, or an XHTML2 DOCTYPE for that matter.

Of course, a lot more HTML4 documents would be valid HTML5 than XHTML 2 
documents.

- Sam Ruby
Received on Monday, 4 December 2006 12:59:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Monday, 13 April 2015 23:08:31 UTC