* ned.freed@mrochek.com wrote:
The fact that these subtypes of text are in widespread use leads me to suggest an alternate approach: Why not register them, but mark them as obsolete with a pointer to the type that should be used instead? The registration will then serve two purposes: To make it clear what the types contain when they are used and to also make it clear they should no longer be used.
The draft states that text/ecmascript is expected to be deprecated in a future version of the document. This basically means text/ecmascript should not be used in a context where application/ecmascript could be used as well. Marking text/ecmascript as obsolete does not allow making such a distinction as far as I can tell, and I think the registration should acknowledge that users of the types do not have much of a choice at the moment. Consider for example <http://validator.w3.org/> which I help to develop; it currently only offers SGML DTD validation but we are planning to add features to report other errors and provide warnings e.g. in cases where a specification states something SHOULD NOT be done. Marking a media type as obsolete would basically mean that it SHOULD NOT be used, so it would be reasonable to for a document like <!DOCTYPE html ...> ... <script type="text/ecmascript"> ... to generate a warning like Warning: use application/ecmascript instead of text/ecmascript That's however not a reasonable suggestion at the moment. So maybe I should add text such as "Use of text/ecmascript in a context where application/ecmascript could be used as well is discouraged" to make this clearer? -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Weinh. Str. 22 · Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/