- From: Charles Iliya Krempeaux <supercanadian@gmail.com>
- Date: Mon, 5 Apr 2010 08:57:49 -0700
Hello, On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Swampert <pokemon260 at gmail.com> wrote: > > Dear WHATAG, > In your HTML5 draft standard, the default value for type attribute in script element is "text/javascript". While according to RFC 4329, the MIME type "text/javascript" > is obsolete, the proper MIME type for JavaScript is "application/javascript" or "application/ecmascript". And Apache also can serve .js files as application/javascript MIME > type. And JavaScript is obviously somewhat a kind of application, we already serve XHTML1.1/XHTML5 webpages as application/xhtml+xml, why don't we use > application/* on JavaScript? Isn't the reason that XML (including XHTML) changed from the text/* MIME types to the application/* MIME types have to do with problems that occurred with Character Transcoding that automagically happens from Transcoding Proxies when the HTTP Content-Type is give as a text/* MIME type?!? Specifically, the issue that occurs when an XML document (explicitly or implicitly) declares an encoding different than the Content-Type (explicitly or implicitly) declared by HTTP?! I.e., I don't think they are choosing application/* MIME types because JavaScript is "a kind of application". (Not that the "application/*" MIME type actually means that the file, with said MIME type, is "a kind of application".) -- Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc. http://changelog.ca/ Everything a Web Developer or Web Designer Should Know - http://w3remix.com/
Received on Monday, 5 April 2010 08:57:49 UTC