- From: Jonas Sicking <jonas@sicking.cc>
- Date: Tue, 08 May 2007 15:49:56 -0700
- To: Maciej Stachowiak <mjs@apple.com>, Web APIs WG <public-webapi@w3.org>
Maciej Stachowiak wrote: >> If we are making the list absolute, I feel weird about including >> things like 'text/xsl' and 'text/rdf' as neither of them are real >> mimetypes. Is there really a lot that would break if 'text/xsl' was >> not included? > > No clue. I don't think it's bad to make requirements for unofficial MIME > types, since in theory no one should be using them for either XML or > non-XML, so UA requirements for them can be considered error handling. Sure, it wouldn't be the end of the world if we did include them. But I'd rather that we default to not do stuff like this unless it is shown that it'll break a lot of content. Anne: was there a reason 'text/xsl' was included other than "IE does it"? Or is it known to actually break sites? / Jonas
Received on Tuesday, 8 May 2007 22:52:57 UTC