I understand. However, and this is probably my answer to the original ISSUE: I do not think we have *any* feasible alternative than to follow the MIME type of the 'host' document. Ivan Dan Brickley wrote: > > Ivan Herman wrote: >> Dan, >> >> not pushing aside your question (for which I do not have a clear answer >> at the moment, I must admit), can you explain how this issue influences >> the original ISSUE-29? > > Sure. Mime types define semantics of #blah. There are established, but > different, precedents for the existing RDF and XHTML mimetypes. I wanted > to make sure that if the XHTML mime type route is taken, there is no > unexpected impact on #blah usage for non-document resources. > > Does that make sense? > > Dan > -- Ivan Herman, W3C Semantic Web Activity Lead URL: http://www.w3.org/People/Ivan/ PGP Key: http://www.cwi.nl/%7Eivan/AboutMe/pgpkey.html FOAF: http://www.ivan-herman.net/foaf.rdf
Received on Tuesday, 19 June 2007 12:44:01 UTC