Re: HTML3.2 and the standards process

Daniel W. Connolly (
Thu, 09 May 1996 19:38:40 -0400

Message-Id: <>
To: Paul Prescod <>
Subject: Re: HTML3.2 and the standards process
In-Reply-To: Your message of "Thu, 09 May 1996 17:16:19 EDT."
Date: Thu, 09 May 1996 19:38:40 -0400
From: "Daniel W. Connolly" <>

In message <>, Paul Prescod writes:
>Since the IETF defines what text/html is I think that a HTTP server that
>delivers HTML 3.2 as text/html would be in error unless the IETF (though the
>HTML-WG) decides to update the definition of text/html to allow HTML 3.2,
>which would, I expect,  be a very long and painful process.

About HTTP, I think you're right. The definition of text/html
needs to change. I proposed putting that on the HTML WG charter,
but it doesn't look likely.

And strictly speaking, it doesn't have to be done there.

The way I understand it, the IETF defines not what text/html is,
but the binding between the name text/html and the relavent spec.

That binding is stored at:

and it currently points to RFC1866.

Any updates/enhancements to RFC1866 in the IETF would go through
the HTML working group, but changes to the binding between
text/html and the relavent spec don't necessarily involve any
working groups or the publication of any documents. You just
send a request to IANA, after discussing it on the ietf-types
mailing list.


	MIME media types
	Last modified: Mon Mar 11 11:25:32 1996

(found from the MIME FAQ, available at: