W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-html-bugzilla@w3.org > April 2009

[Bug 6684] Disregard of RFC 4329 and IANA MIME Media Types

From: <bugzilla@wiggum.w3.org>
Date: Thu, 02 Apr 2009 19:56:08 +0000
To: public-html-bugzilla@w3.org
Message-Id: <E1LpT1E-0005pC-AP@wiggum.w3.org>

Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de> changed:

           What    |Removed                     |Added
             Status|RESOLVED                    |REOPENED
         Resolution|WONTFIX                     |

--- Comment #27 from Sierk Bornemann <sierkb@gmx.de>  2009-04-02 19:56:07 ---
(In reply to comment #26)
> Based on these comments I changed the note in the spec to: "Similarly, the MIME
> type used to refer to JavaScript in this specification is text/javascript,
> since that is the most commonly used type, despite it being an officially
> obsoleted type according to RFC 4329. [RFC4329]"

Why not also calling the per RFC 4329 recommended Mimetypes per name and
saying, what Mimetypes RFC 4329 recommends instead??

What about section Scripting languages
(http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#scriptingLanguages) and the
whole zoo of mimetypes?
Although the Spec-Draft says "User agents may support other MIME types and
other languages", where is the note also in that section, that RFC 4329 does
make a clear cleanup and recommendation at that point in favour of manageable
(and easy to memorizy) 2 Mimetypes?

BTW: I've reopened the bug, because you tend to move and make some
modifications (and the fact, that there _are_ in fact modifications to the
Spec, contradict the Status "RESOLVED WONTFIX" of this Bug). OK for you?

Configure bugmail: http://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/userprefs.cgi?tab=email
------- You are receiving this mail because: -------
You are the QA contact for the bug.
Received on Thursday, 2 April 2009 19:56:21 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 20:00:53 UTC