Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
On Jun 12, 2006, at 13:55, Costello, Roger L. wrote: > Henri Sivonen said that if I take this simple XML: > > <?xml version="1.0"?> > > <root> > > Blah > > </root> > > and put it into Word, then the media type (MIME) is: > > application/msword That's because the outer wrapper is then a Word file. It isn't something you can feed to XML parser. Of course, I am assuming that you are saving as .doc. If you save as plain text, the same consideration apply as for Notepad. > Conversely, if I put the same XML into Notepad, then the media type > (MIME) is: > > application/xml > > Why is that? In that case, there is no editor-specific wrapper format, so the result is suitable for feeding to an XML parser. However, I also said that text/plain is appropriate if you don't intend the file to be processed as XML but want it processed as plain text (perhaps for the purpose of discussing XML). > Why is it that if I put XML into one editor (Word) I get a media > type that is specific to the editor, whereas if I put XML into > another editor (Notepad) then I get a media type that is > independent of the editor? Because one editor applies an editor-specific wrapper format and the other does not. > Suppose that I put the XML into Wordpad, what is the media type? Depends on how you save. > What are the general rules for determining the media type of XML? If the data object is suitable for feeding to an XML parser, the type is application/xml or a more specific type. A more specific type such as application/xhtml+xml or application/atom+xml is appropriate if the document is suitable for processing by a specialized UA (in this case for XHTML and Atom respectively). -- Henri Sivonen hsivonen@i... http://hsivonen.iki.fi/
|
