- From: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
- Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 01:56:18 +0100
- To: www-tag@w3.org
Am 01.02.2011 01:38, schrieb Eric J. Bowman: > Bob Ferris wrote: >> >> schrieb Eric J. Bowman: >>> Nathan wrote: >>>> >>>> Ideally they wouldn't, they'd use "text/html" as normal, and to >>>> find the related RFC/spec (rather than googling) they'd simply >>>> lookup http://media-type-registry.w3.org/text/html which would >>>> redirect through to the relevant specification. >>>> >>> >>> Which relevant specification? What would the URI equivalent of >>> text/html "point to"? >> >> Something like http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt ? >> > > You can't assume a 1:1 mapping, which brings us back to, what media > type does the following URI indicate? > > http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt This document defines media types not a single media type. That means, I need URI to address each concrete complete media type e.g., http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.html#sec-8.18 for "application/rdf+xml". Whether other specifications are included (imported) in this concrete media type specification is another issue e.g., I guess "application/rdf+xml" requires also the media type specification for the "XML media type". A redirection for "*+xml" media types to http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.html is not sufficient, because it usually wouldn't completely describe the concrete media type. I think a direct mapping is necessary. When two media types use the same URI then they are equal e.g., AFAIK the media type for Turtle isn't a standard one and e.g. "application/rdf+turtle" and "text/turtle" exist in the wild. Cheers, Bob
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 00:56:47 UTC