- From: Florent Georges <fgeorges@fgeorges.org>
- Date: Fri, 6 Feb 2009 17:14:59 +0100
- To: XProc Comments <public-xml-processing-model-comments@w3.org>
Hi,
In p:http-request, when using @override-content-type, should
c:body/@content-type contain the overridden content type, or the
overriding one? For instance, with the following request:
<c:request override-content-type="text/plain" .../>
should we get:
<c:response ...>
<c:header name="Content-Type" value="application/xml"/>
...
<c:body content-type="text/plain">
...
</c:body>
</c:response>
or instead:
<c:response ...>
<c:header name="Content-Type" value="application/xml"/>
...
<c:body content-type="application/xml">
...
</c:body>
</c:response>
Personally, I think the former is more logical, because
c:body/@content-type represent the type used to build the c:body,
the original content type being still available in the headers.
But I can't find a clear response in the CR.
A related question is: should we use the full Content-Type
header value, or just the media type within it for @content-type?
For instance, should we get:
<c:header name="Content-Type" value="text/xml; charset=utf-8"/>
<c:body content-type="text/xml">
or:
<c:header name="Content-Type" value="text/xml; charset=utf-8"/>
<c:body content-type="text/xml; charset=utf-8">
in the c:response?
Regards,
--
Florent Georges
http://www.fgeorges.org/
Received on Friday, 6 February 2009 16:15:40 UTC