- From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
- Date: 17 Jan 2002 19:31:10 -0500
- To: "Roy T. Fielding" <fielding@ebuilt.com>
- Cc: www-tag@w3.org, ietf-xml-mime@imc.org
On Thu, 2002-01-17 at 18:18, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > I think the mistake is in assigning such messages a type that implies > it should be handled by a generic XML processor. There is no such thing, No such thing? There are all kinds of processing gidgets and storage systems that work on XML generically. You might want to choose more precise language. > even though it is possible to view all XML types via generic XML tools. Viewing is just one possibility. > A more architecturally fitting course of action would be to create a > top-level media type of xml and then have xml/* subtypes, but for > some reason (deployed apps, I presume) the top-level namespace has been > frozen for ages. That proposal went over like a lead ballon - see the ietf-xml-mime archives for much more detail. +xml, a 'lesser' though similar notion, wasn't exactly easy to put across either. -- Simon St.Laurent Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets Errors, errors, all fall down! http://simonstl.com
Received on Thursday, 17 January 2002 18:27:32 UTC