On 18.11.2010 23:22, Chris Lilley wrote:
...
In that case I can remove the section.
...
Thanks for that!
...
Julian, does that satisfy your concern as well?
...
Partly. As Björn already said, the svgz file extension still is
mentioned in a way that could be understood to say that the gzipped
variant *is* the same mime type.
I think we have now agree that it is not, right?
One way to address this would be to mention it elsewhere, stating this
is just a convention, and how it needs to be handled. I do believe that
the registration template is not the best place for it, though (maybe a
WG Note that establishes the filename convention and shows how to serve
that stuff over HTTP?).
Of course an alternative is to make it a *separate* media type. I
believe that Maciej Stachowiak said at the Lyon TPAC that Safari on
MacOS internally uses media types, and that they actually had to add a
workaround so that they could map both *.svg and *.svgz to the same
(hopefully I got that right; cc'ing him). That's exactly the kind of
problem I'm hoping to avoid.
Best regards, Julian