Lists Home |
Date Index |
Michael Brennan wrote:
> > content-type: application/purchase-order+xml
> > ....
> > <po>...</po>
> So now we are back to using media types to designate everything?
> If this is a REST principle, then REST has gotten this one wrong and the W3C
> (with their emphasis on URIs for unique names) have got this one right.
The relationship between URIs and mime types is an open issue at the
W3C. One approach under consideration is just to define a mapping
between them. Another is to attach a URI after the application/xml type.
> What's wrong with URIs?
There is nothing wrong with URIs but they are just not what is used on
the Internet for media type designation. I personally don't think that
XML should be a special case. Either types in general should move to
URIs or XML should use MIME types like everything else.