On Sun February 13 2005 14:10, ned.freed@mrochek.com wrote:
You have previously claimed that people will only look at the list of registrations and not bother to look at the actual registrations. By this logic a discussion of unregistered types buried in the text for some other type isn't going to be seen.
Yes.
You can't have it both ways. And please don't bother claiming that the lack of a registration for these text types will serve as a warning not to use them
By itself, it won't serve as a warning. The problem is that there is no visible, clear place to provide a warning. If somebody (typically a developer) is looking for an appropriate type and sees application/ecmascript and application/javascript, he is likely to use one of those. If text/javascript etc. are also registered and he sees one of those first, that's what he's likely to use. The latter is what we would like to avoid.