Re: Registration of media typeimage/svg+xml

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 Bj=F6rn 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