Re: Unknown text/* subtypes

Ian Hickson wrote:
 
> For example HTML4 says to not default to any encoding at all [1]
[...]

Yes, but HTTP has to work for plain text, pre-HTML 4, etc., and I
think HHTP needs its own idea of what is allowed in a HTTP header.

If one side refuses to say what the body is the other side needs
a working assumption for the job at hand (= HTTP transmission). 
How browsers display a body (if at all) is a different question.

"Assume it's something remotely related to ASCII, i.e. all octets
 that could be ASCII actually are ASCII" is good enough for HTTP,
isn't it ?  I don't see where "assume Latin-1" is actually needed
today with respect to *HTTP*, even for HTML 2 (or arguably 3.2).  

The W3C validator ignores this HTML detail - AFAIK I'm the only
user who ever asked if that's as it should be.  It is irrelevant
outside of validator torture tests... :-)

> it would seem pointless for HTTP to try to define something
> here: it would just get ignored.

I think we mean the same thing when I propose that it's pointless
to define "something different from MIME" in the HTTP spec., a
normative MIME reference (+ explanation of the change) will do.

 Frank