[whatwg] Will you consider about RFC 4329?

Charles Iliya Krempeaux supercanadian at gmail.com
Mon Apr 5 08:57:49 PDT 2010


On Mon, Apr 5, 2010 at 6:11 AM, Swampert <pokemon260 at gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear WHATAG,
> In your HTML5 draft standard, the default value for type attribute in script element is "text/javascript". While according to RFC 4329, the MIME type "text/javascript"
> is obsolete, the proper MIME type for JavaScript is "application/javascript" or "application/ecmascript". And Apache also can serve .js files as application/javascript MIME
> type.  And JavaScript is obviously somewhat a kind of application, we already serve XHTML1.1/XHTML5 webpages as application/xhtml+xml, why don't we use
> application/* on JavaScript?

Isn't the reason that XML (including XHTML) changed from the text/*
MIME types to the application/* MIME types have to do with problems
that occurred with Character Transcoding that automagically happens
from Transcoding Proxies when the HTTP Content-Type is give as a
text/* MIME type?!  Specifically, the issue that occurs when an XML
document (explicitly or implicitly) declares an encoding different
than the Content-Type (explicitly or implicitly) declared by HTTP?!

I.e., I don't think they are choosing application/* MIME types because
JavaScript is "a kind of application".  (Not that the "application/*"
MIME type actually means that the file, with said MIME type, is "a
kind of application".)

Charles Iliya Krempeaux, B.Sc.

Everything a Web Developer or Web Designer Should Know - http://w3remix.com/

More information about the whatwg mailing list