W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-talk@w3.org > July to August 2001

Re: Content type of TR/ruby/xhtml-ruby-1.mod

From: Masayasu Ishikawa <mimasa@w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2001 03:43:50 +0900
To: www-html@w3.org
Cc: www-talk@w3.org
Message-Id: <20010802034350U.mimasa@w3.mag.keio.ac.jp>
"William F. Hammond" <hammond@csc.albany.edu> wrote:

> > [1] http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby
> 
> A well-written W3C recommendation.
> 
> As things are by default (in a platform OS that correctly does not
> arrogate to itself knowledge of the meaning of a "suffix" found in a
> URI), its normative appendix A cannot be read in Amaya's window.

The Ruby spec [1] explicitly says that appendix A is "informative" [2].

> I'm not saying that "application/xml-dtd" is wrong, but it seems to me
> in this case not to be the best choice by the content provider.

Probably the content provider considered that "sane" people don't
have to "read" that informative appendix.

> Please note that if a user configures a user agent to call a
> text/plain reader for application/xml-dtd, this will preclude other
> use of that content type by the user agent.  That other use in other
> contexts might, in fact, be the intent of the authors of RFC 3023.

You might want to read the "Introduction of media types for XML DTDs"
thread on the ietf-xml-mime mailing list [3].

[2] http://www.w3.org/TR/ruby/#module
[3] http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/threads.html#00191

Regards,
-- 
Masayasu Ishikawa / mimasa@w3.org
W3C - World Wide Web Consortium
Received on Wednesday, 1 August 2001 14:43:58 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 27 October 2010 18:14:26 GMT