- From: Phillip Hallam-Baker <hallam@ai.mit.edu>
- Date: Mon, 27 Jul 1998 16:05:49 -0400
- To: "Jim Davis" <jdavis@parc.xerox.com>, <w3c-dist-auth@w3.org>
> WebDAV replies are never intended for direct human viewing, right? Is > there a reason then that the WebDAV spec uses text/xml and does not even > mention application/xml? It seems to me that the latter is closer to the > intended use of WebDAV XML (as opposed to XML markup that's > embedded in HTML). > > If this is right, the spec should say that a WebDAV server MUST > accept both > application/xml and text/xml, and MUST generate application/xml. > > Would this be good, aside from the fact that it would require change to > some existing softwares? The IANA content type categorizations have never been particularly usefull wrt text. According to the rules html should have been application/html since it is not ascii text... I would recommend text/xml since if the DTD is declared a generic xml text viewer could well make a decent job at presenting the content and in general XML is aimed as a text markup language.. Phill
Received on Monday, 27 July 1998 16:09:08 UTC