Re :Bad News on IE6 XML Support

[Murata Makoto <mura034@attglobal.net>]

> The new MIME type for XSLT will by the way be application/xml+xslt, not
> text/xml+xslt, at least this is outlined in section 8.17 of RFC 3023,
> but I don't see any Internet Draft for the registration of this MIME
> type, and I blame the WG hereby for beeing lazy. There isn't any
> Internet draft for any SVG MIME type either, so one can't use SVG on the
> web today, this is horrible. The SVG recommendation even mandates MIME
> types that don't exist.

8.17 of RFC 3023 shows one possibility, but is not authoritative.

> Anyway, sorry if I am missing something, but as far as I can tell there
> is not even a media type for XSLT yet (and the RFC says that the media
> type in the example SHOULD NOT be used until a real media type gets
> registered).  And again, I may be missing something major, but why
> wouldn't text/xsl+xml be the natural thing that got registered, since
> that is the de-facto standard now anyway?  Please accept my very sincere
> apologies if I am stepping on some ground that has been hashed over and
> is contentious; I am just curious?

I believe that the WG is happy with application/xml and do not see 
any requirements to register specialized media types for XSLT.  Could 
somebody in the XSL WG confirm this?

By the way, text/* is inappropriate for XSLT, since casual users 
will not like fallback to text/plain.  More about this, see RFC 3023,
RFC 2045, and RFC 2046.

Cheers,

Makoto (a co-author of RFC 3023)