W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > xsl-editors@w3.org > October to December 1999

RE: Inconsistency between IETF and W3C: XML fragments and media types

From: Larry Masinter <lmm@acm.org>
Date: Wed, 24 Nov 1999 21:31:27 PST
To: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>, "Dan Connolly" <connolly@w3.org>
Cc: "MURATA Makoto" <murata.makoto@fujixerox.co.jp>, <timbl@w3.org>, <simonstl@simonstl.com>, <ietf-xml-mime@imc.org>, <Tsmith@parc.xerox.com>, <xsl-editors@w3.org>
Message-ID: <002001bf3706$52507800$15d0000d@copper.parc.xerox.com>
> > My recollection is that type="..." is advisory: it helps user agents
> > optimize for the case that they don't know the relevant media type,
> > so they can skip fetching the thing. So it would be odd for it
> > to be mandatory. But sure enough! it is:
>
> > I wonder why it's mandatory.
> 
> Because typically, CSS processors cannot deal with XSL stylesheets and
> XSL processors cannot deal with CSS stylesheets, and avioding
> downloading the thing if it is not a type you can process is highly
> desirable.

This reasoning doesn't apply when the stylesheet is embedded, which
is the case we're complaining about. It's fine to supply a type
for an external stylesheet, it isn't fine to supply (or require
supplying) a type for embedded stylesheets that are referenced
via a fragment identifier.

Larry
Received on Thursday, 25 November 1999 00:32:10 GMT

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