W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > July to September 1999

Re: Not text/xsl

From: James Clark <jjc@jclark.com>
Date: Thu, 22 Jul 1999 18:09:48 +0700
Message-ID: <3796FBFB.ABF54E22@jclark.com>
To: MURATA Makoto <murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp>
CC: xsl-editors@w3.org
The one place where it is mentioned is in an example.  The document has
to have that example, and I can't do that example without mentioning a
media-type.  To me text/xsl makes much more sense than application/xsl.
The best I can do is to add a note saying that the media-type hasn't
been decided and text/xsl is not registered yet.

MURATA Makoto wrote:
> 
> At the ietf-xml-mime  mailing list, Ned Freed (a co-author of MIME RFCs)
> said that the media type for XSL should belong to the application
> top-level media type rather than the text type.  We certainly
> need to discuss.  Until a final decision is made, the WD should not
> mention "text/xsl".
> 
> http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/
> 
> Cheers,
> 
> Makoto
> 
> Fuji Xerox Information Systems
> 
> Tel: +81-44-812-7230   Fax: +81-44-812-7231
> E-mail: murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp
Received on Saturday, 24 July 1999 02:07:30 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:59:49 GMT