[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
On Fri, 2002-02-01 at 15:33, Daniel Veillard wrote:
> XPointer as XLink is document oriented, that was
> the charter of the group I think. You can revisit this and say
> that text/xml and application/xml should have different fragment
> identifiers (XPointer in the first case and some simpler proposal for
> the latter), well that could be one way to clearly differenciate both
> Mime-Types in the mind of the public, why not.
There is no notion in RFC 3023 that text/xml and application/xml refer
respectively to document- and data-oriented XML. The differences
between the two are primarily about character set handling, and I
suspect a lot of people at the IETF would like to see text/xml disappear
completely.
http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt
There are a lot of reasons why not - visit ietf-xml-mime@imc.org for a
more detailed exploration. (Archives at
http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/index.html)
--
Simon St.Laurent
Ring around the content, a pocket full of brackets
Errors, errors, all fall down!
http://simonstl.com
|
