W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-archive@w3.org > January 2008

Re: Unknown text/* subtypes

From: Frank Ellermann <nobody@xyzzy.claranet.de>
Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 04:12:32 +0100
To: www-archive@w3.org
Message-ID: <fmh89s$g2g$1@ger.gmane.org>
Cc: ietf-types@alvestrand.no,ietf-http-wg@w3.org

Ian Hickson wrote:
 
> For example HTML4 says to not default to any encoding at all [1]
[...]

Yes, but HTTP has to work for plain text, pre-HTML 4, etc., and I
think HHTP needs its own idea of what is allowed in a HTTP header.

If one side refuses to say what the body is the other side needs
a working assumption for the job at hand (= HTTP transmission). 
How browsers display a body (if at all) is a different question.

"Assume it's something remotely related to ASCII, i.e. all octets
 that could be ASCII actually are ASCII" is good enough for HTTP,
isn't it ?  I don't see where "assume Latin-1" is actually needed
today with respect to *HTTP*, even for HTML 2 (or arguably 3.2).  

The W3C validator ignores this HTML detail - AFAIK I'm the only
user who ever asked if that's as it should be.  It is irrelevant
outside of validator torture tests... :-)

> it would seem pointless for HTTP to try to define something
> here: it would just get ignored.

I think we mean the same thing when I propose that it's pointless
to define "something different from MIME" in the HTTP spec., a
normative MIME reference (+ explanation of the change) will do.

 Frank
Received on Tuesday, 15 January 2008 03:12:18 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 7 November 2012 14:18:12 GMT