- From: Etan Wexler <ewexler@stickdog.com>
- Date: Sun, 17 Mar 2002 20:46:42 -0500
- To: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>, Web style list <www-style@w3.org>
Chris Lilley wrote on 12 March 2002: > The trouble is, there are no font/* MIME > types and [it is] a lot of trouble to get a new tree. I wonder why the 'application' MIME type is unsuitable, given approporiate subtypes. The existing 'application/font-tdpfr' (for Bitstream's Portable Font Resource) subtype is one example. I would think that other subtypes would be easy to define and easy to register under the 'application' type. If font subtypes do not fit in the IETF tree, the vendor tree is ready and willing. What would we gain by the addition of a 'font' MIME type? -- Etan Wexler
Received on Sunday, 17 March 2002 20:48:24 UTC