11864 2011-01-25 17:02:37 +0000 section "12 IANA considerations 12.1 text/html" suggests: "This registration is for community review and will be submitted to ...registration with IANA." I understand from this that it it intended to replace RFC 2854. If so I have a problem with the stat 2011-08-04 05:14:36 +0000 1 1 1 Unclassified HTML WG LC1 HTML5 spec unspecified Other other RESOLVED WONTFIX http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top P3 normal --- 1 contributor ian ian julian.reschke mike mjs Ms2ger public-html-admin public-html-wg-issue-tracking public-html-bugzilla oldest_to_newest 44719 0 contributor 2011-01-25 17:02:37 +0000 Specification: http://dev.w3.org/html5/spec/Overview.html Section: http://www.whatwg.org/specs/web-apps/current-work/#top Comment: section "12 IANA considerations 12.1 text/html" suggests: "This registration is for community review and will be submitted to ...registration with IANA." I understand from this that it it intended to replace RFC 2854. If so I have a problem with the statement later in the same section: "Published specification: This document is the relevant specification. Labeling a resource with the text/html type asserts that the resource is an HTML document using the HTML syntax." It seems that the definition says that all html documents currently on the web are HTML5 documents. This is clearly not the situation. the registration of text/html media type should recognize that there are many versions of HTML used on the web, as RFC 2854 does. Nir Dagan nir@nirdagan.com Posted from: 109.66.1.55 44765 1 Ms2ger 2011-01-26 20:01:49 +0000 WFM. The RFC you cite states Published specification: The text/html media type is now defined by W3C Recommendations; the latest published version is [HTML401]. In addition, [XHTML1] defines a profile of use of XHTML which is compatible with HTML 4.01 and which may also be labeled as text/html. Note also that it states "...an HTML document", not "...an HTML5 document". I believe this has also been discussed to death several times in the WG. 44767 2 julian.reschke 2011-01-26 20:16:27 +0000 (In reply to comment #1) > WFM. The RFC you cite states > > Published specification: > The text/html media type is now defined by W3C Recommendations; > the latest published version is [HTML401]. In addition, [XHTML1] > defines a profile of use of XHTML which is compatible with HTML > 4.01 and which may also be labeled as text/html. > > Note also that it states "...an HTML document", not "...an HTML5 document". > > I believe this has also been discussed to death several times in the WG. "ms2ger", I'm not sure why you're closing bugs (see decision policy, btw). That being said, this is related to <http://www.w3.org/html/wg/tracker/issues/53> which is still open. 44769 3 Ms2ger 2011-01-26 20:28:50 +0000 Excellent, "julian". Thank you for the pointer. *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 5744 *** 44771 4 julian.reschke 2011-01-26 20:38:17 +0000 No, this is not a duplicate of 5744. It (In reply to comment #3) > Excellent, "julian". Thank you for the pointer. > > *** This bug has been marked as a duplicate of bug 5744 *** Bug 5744 contains discussion relevant to ISSUE-53, but this doesn't make *this* bug a duplicate. 44775 5 mjs 2011-01-26 21:06:00 +0000 I agree that this bug is not a duplicate. 45694 6 ian 2011-02-16 09:50:41 +0000 EDITOR'S RESPONSE: This is an Editor's Response to your comment. If you are satisfied with this response, please change the state of this bug to CLOSED. If you have additional information and would like the editor to reconsider, please reopen this bug. If you would like to escalate the issue to the full HTML Working Group, please add the TrackerRequest keyword to this bug, and suggest title and text for the tracker issue; or you may create a tracker issue yourself, if you are able to do so. For more details, see this document: http://dev.w3.org/html5/decision-policy/decision-policy.html Status: Rejected Change Description: no spec change Rationale: The HTML specification subsumes all previous HTML specifications, and as such it is indeed the appropriate reference for text/html. (Note that this is consistent with past text/html registrations.) 53515 7 mike 2011-08-04 05:14:36 +0000 mass-move component to LC1