MURATA Makoto wrote:
I would suggest application/xsl-xml (other than application/xml).
Why application/xsl-xml rather than application/xslt-xml? Wouldn't
application/xsl-xml would suggest it was limited to XSL stylesheets
(i.e. XSLT stylesheets that generate XSL FOs)? What's needed is
something that works for any XSLT stylesheet.
Since XSL stylesheets are not readable for casual readers, text/* is not
appropriate (see the criteria explained by Ned Freed [1]).
I'm not sure I would agree that all XSLT stylesheets are not readable by
casual readers.
However, there are certainly plenty of XSLT stylesheets that aren't
suitable for casual readers, and I think having both a text/* and an
application/* registration is an unnecessary complication, so I would be
happy with application/*.
It might be a
good idea to follow the "*/*-xml" contention,
What exactly is the current status of this convention? Has this
convention become the official policy of the media types registry? If
not, when is it expected to become the official policy?
James