- From: Peter Flynn <pflynn@curia.ucc.ie>
- Date: 04 Nov 1996 09:05:10 +0000 (GMT)
- To: www-html@w3.org
Fote wrote: > Subir Grewal <grewals@acf2.NYU.EDU> wrote: > >[...] > ><OBJECT type="text/html" data=/cgi-bin/text-counter/fullpath/to/doc > >></OBJECT> > > > >The CGI-script would simply return something like: > > > >76546 hits since August 12, 1996 [...] > What you describe is text/plain which would not be a problem > for Lynx to inline, but it's not clear what to really expect when > the TYPE claims text/html, Wouldn't it be better as text/plain, and restricting the output of the script to unmarked text. Or does the whole idea imply we need a new type text/insert or text/fragment? ///Peter
Received on Monday, 4 November 1996 07:34:39 UTC