[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: Finishing the XML-tagging discussion
At 11:10 AM 3/20/00 -0800, Marshall Rose wrote:
> > Content-type: image/svg; representation="xml"
> If we absolutely have to do this with a separate piece of information, I
> opt for a content-feature tag. That way there's a clear delineation
> when feature information is or is not present, and we don't mess up MIME
> parameter space. And we need the feature tag anyway for negotiation
hmmm. my view of the example above is that XML is being used as the syntax
but the semantics of the blob being passed are still SVG semantics.
A closer MIME analogue to this would appear to me
Content-transfer-encoding. Thus, precedent suggests a separate header
being the way to go *IF* a separate piece of information is required.