[whatwg] Will you consider about RFC 4329?

Anne van Kesteren annevk at opera.com
Tue Apr 6 02:42:21 PDT 2010

On Tue, 06 Apr 2010 11:32:01 +0200, James Kerr <locki at l0x.in> wrote:
> Ian Hickson <ian at hixie.ch> wrote:
>> On Mon, 5 Apr 2010, Swampert wrote:
>>> 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".
>> The type everyone uses is text/javascript. What's the point of using
>> application/javascript? What problem does it solve?
> I believe this has to do with character encoding issues and is the same
> reason that application/xml is preferred over text/xml. MIME types in the
> text/* set apparently have a default encoding of US-ASCII which I can
> imagine may throw up conflicts in some situations given that the primary  
> and generally accepted encoding for XML and HTML documents (and  
> increasingly
> other applications in general) is Unicode based.

In theory this is correct. In practice nobody follows this outdated  
default encoding requirement.

Anne van Kesteren

More information about the whatwg mailing list