Re: Accept: Client Profile
Tony Sanders <sanders@bsdi.com>
Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Message-id: <9308141911.AA22232@austin.BSDI.COM>
To: www-talk@nxoc01.cern.ch
Subject: Re: Accept: Client Profile
In-Reply-To: Your message of Sat, 14 Aug 93 07:45:57 PDT.
Errors-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Reply-To: sanders@bsdi.com
Organization: Berkeley Software Design, Inc.
Date: Sat, 14 Aug 1993 14:11:32 -0500
From: Tony Sanders <sanders@bsdi.com>
Status: RO
> 1. application/latex, troff-*, etc. should be text/* instead. Something
> should be supertype text when it can be treated as text/plain by default.
> Note that this doesn't apply to Postcript, dvi, etc.
Is MIME considering them as text/* types?
> 2. I like your archive supertype but if we go with it we should make sure
> it gets into MIME proper. Note that creating a new supertype is much
> harder than creating a new subtype.
If it's useful MIME will adopt it. Of course, the MIME types always
override whatever we define (e.g., they defined application/zip, so
I removed it from the archive type).
> 3. The non-standard types should all have "x-" in front of them.
Consider these HTTP types and not MIME types.
> I can't decide whether to resist the use of all those new types; we can't
Who gives a hoot, let the market sort it out. The types should be defined
for those that need them.
> Should we consider the danger of leaving image/cmu-raster (surely
> sunraster is more ubiquitous) and archive/sv4cpio in the list?
I'm happy to add sunraster, what do you want me to call it?
--sanders