Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
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 Hopefully RFC 3023 will be superseded by an RFC that deprecates text/xml.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 hsivonen@i... http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
|
