• To: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
• Subject: Re: Compound processing
• From: Paul Prescod <paul@p...>
• Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2002 14:37:27 -0800
• Cc: "xml-dev@l..." <xml-dev@l...>
• References: <200201232233.RAA15245@m...>

I think you misunderstood my question. Why would it be difficult to
"invent"

application/x-xhtml_with_svg+xml

You said you were trying to make life easier so that people don't have
to invent new MIME types. But inventing MIME types is easy.

And what would be the downside of just passing your data off as 

text/xhtml+xml

If XHTML is *defined* to be extensible then the data is XHTML. What it
embeds is no more relevant than what it refers to with SRC and HREF
links. If XHTML was not defined to be extensible then you should invent
a new MIME type and describe how you are (ab)using the XHTML namespace.

 Paul Prescod

• Follow-Ups:
  • Re: Compound processing
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>
  • Re: Compound processing
    • From: "Simon St.Laurent" <simonstl@s...>

• References:
  • Re: Compound processing
    • From: Mark Baker <distobj@a...>

• Prev by Date: RE: Better is better
• Next by Date: A conceptual excursion (was: RDDL; what a namespace is; what is the meaning of life; etc. etc. etc.)
• Previous by thread: Re: Compound processing
• Next by thread: Re: Compound processing
• Index(es):
  • Date
  • Thread