RE: text/xhtml+xml vs. application/xhtml+xml

> Gavin, I just want to point out that no one is arguing that 
> MHTML is a bad thing.

I'm sorry for going down a rat hole. My reaction was to Keith's
statements...

  >I think the general consensus of the MIME community is that making HTML
  >a subtype of "text/" was a mistake.
  ...
  >So IMHO we should learn from this experience and make XHTML and other
  >XML-ish things subtypes of application/.

and I was just trying to point out that text/* is fine for some things...
for example text/xml *if* the text is generic/not application specific.
For example, if I have a multipart message with an XML document, and
a CSS stylesheet, I think text/xml would be fine for the XML (and
perhaps application/css for the CSS ;-)).

Apart from that I agree with the general direction.