Christoph Anton Mitterer writes ("Re: About the media types text/x-php and
text/x-php-source"):
> On Tue, 2012-08-28 at 16:05 +0200, Vincent Lefevre wrote:
> > You misread what I've said. text/javascript and text/ecmascript
> > (which were used for execution -- this is what this RFC is about)
> > are obsolete, but not text/plain.
I think this is probably a mistake by the IETF.
> Yep you're right,... I over-read that :D... but this thread goes about
> text/x-php, which I still think would be wrong,... not about marking
> them as text/plain.
Do you think then that the source code language (eg for syntax
highlighting or whatever) should never be represented in a mime type ?
Or perhaps it should be an attribute ?
> > text/x-javascript could be used to, in order to provide information
> > about the language, even though it is not standard (hence the "x-").
>
> Yeah,.. could... but... I think adding a x- type for widespread use
> should always be the last solution, sooner or later these may cause
> troubles.
I don't agree with this.
> And if e.g. an email client is smart enough to know that
> text/x-javascript is not to be executed but that it should use
> JavaScript highlighting, then it can easily be smart enough, too, to
> know that it shouldn't execute application/javascript per default, but
> rather display it.
In the latter case we need to teach _all_ user agents to display
application/javascript rather than do something else with it. In the
former case we only need to teach anything to those user agents for
which text/we think a prettier display than that available for
text/plain is desirable.
Ian.
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-devel-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Archive:
http://lists.debian.org/20540.55440.915217.544...@chiark.greenend.org.uk
