On Jun 10, 2006, at 16:48, Costello, Roger L. wrote:
> In the list [1] of media types (MIME) it shows two different media
> types for XML:
>
> application/xml
>
> text/xml
>
>
> What’s the difference between these two?
text/xml has impractical rules for character encoding defaulting.
application/xml should be used instead. Hopefully RFC 3023 will be
superseded by an RFC that deprecates text/xml.
The charset parameter on application/xml is silly, too.
> <?xml version=”1.0”?>
Smart quotes are wrong there.
> <root>
>
> Blah
>
> </root>
>
>
> Suppose I take this simple XML and put it into a MS Word document.
> What’s its media type? Is it:
>
>
> application/msword,
Yes.
> Suppose that I put it into a Notepad document. Now what’s its
> media type? Is it:
>
>
> text/plain, or
If you don't want it to be processed as XML.
> application/xml
If you want it to be processed as XML.
> Suppose that I put it into a Notepad document and then, using
> Winzip, I compress it. Now what’s its media type? Is it:
>
> application/zip,
Yes.
--
Henri Sivonen
http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
