- From: Bert Bos <bert@w3.org>
- Date: Tue, 7 Feb 2006 14:44:16 +0100
- To: public-cdf@w3.org
On Saturday 28 January 2006 22:45, Anne van Kesteren wrote: > > 2) 3.1 Identification > > > > A type like "text/xhtml+xml; profile=WICD" would be easier to > > understand, easier to remember, shorter, would not look like a URL > > and would not need quote marks. A parameter like that would also be > > case-insensitive, like the rest of the MIME type. > > Per RFC 3236 section 8 "profile" is supposed to match the semantics > of the identically named attribute on the <head> element. Thanks for the reference. But the description of that parameter in the RFC seems rather meant to discourage people from using it: It is for the "short term," it is "not expected to be used to deliver content," it is "not expected [...] that origin web servers have any knowledge of it," it is "primarily targeted [at] transcoders." The section ends by recommending the "Content-features" header or CC/PP instead. The text indeed says the parameter has the semantics of the PROFILE attribute of HTML, but thereby it it contradicts itself. The HTML attribute is not meant for transcoders and it *is* meant to deliver content. Indeed, the example in the RFC shows a URL that cannot be used in the PROFILE attribute. If the parameter is meant to reflect the attribute, then I would expect the value to be rather something like profile="http://www.gmpg.org/xfn/11 http://dublincore.org/documents/dcq-html/" which expresses that the document uses the XFN and Dublin Core vocabularies. Are you really sure you want to use this parameter? Bert -- Bert Bos ( W 3 C ) http://www.w3.org/ http://www.w3.org/people/bos W3C/ERCIM bert@w3.org 2004 Rt des Lucioles / BP 93 +33 (0)4 92 38 76 92 06902 Sophia Antipolis Cedex, France
Received on Tuesday, 7 February 2006 13:44:35 UTC