W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-validator@w3.org > June 2003

Re: Problem Validating SCRIPT Element with TYPE Attribute

From: Jim Ley <jim@jibbering.com>
Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2003 14:40:14 -0000
To: www-validator@w3.org
Message-ID: <bd73gu$le2$1@main.gmane.org>

"Ville Skyttä" <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
>On Sun, 2003-06-22 at 17:22, Jim Ley wrote:
>> "Ville Skyttä" <ville.skytta@iki.fi>
>> >
>> ><script type="application/x-javascript"> would be most "correct" [1],
>> >and was the generally accepted best practice too until MSIE 6.something
>> >decided to ignore all scripts with type="application/x-javascript".
>>
>> I believe that MSIE is correct here, the application/x-javascript is an
>> experimental mime-type invented by the Netscape people to label
JavaScript,
>> and since MSIE does not support JavaScript (which has many extensions to
the
>> ECMAScript standard that JScript is compliant to.) it is right not to
honour
>> it.
>
>I would agree with you if they had treated text/javascript the same
>way.  AFAICT, that's still used to label JavaScript, not JScript or
>ECMAScript.

Why?  This wasn't invented for the development of JavaScript, but is
generally used as a generic marker for all ECMAScript compliant languages,
indeed javascript is a very devalued trademark and is generally used to
denote ECMAScript and not just the one implementation.    We've not got a
clue what text/javascript means, we know for sure what
application/x-javascript refers to.

>> Of course, but this is the W3 remember who don't seem to care one jot for
>> mime-type registration for their own recommendations why should we expect
>> them to be consistent with other peoples?

>I wonder what are you specifically referring to here, but I don't think
>that W3C has to have anything to do with JavaScript MIME type
>registration.

Of course not, but things like image/svg+xml have been forced upon us
without care (well we've been repeatedly promised a registration doc, even
been told there's one available just not quite ready for circulation.)

>More related info: :)
><http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-svg/2002Aug/0008.html>

Yes, I advocated it there specifically because all current implementations
use JavaScript (an implementation of ECMAScript with extensions licensed to
use the name from Sun, and given by the implementors the experimental
mime-type "application/x-javascript") and it'd sort out the mess.

Of course you've got to remember that just about anything I suggest on
www-svg, the exact opposite will happen.

Jim.
Received on Monday, 23 June 2003 10:46:15 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 25 April 2012 12:14:09 GMT