On Jun 27, 2005, at 10:32 AM, Bob Ippolito wrote:
On Jun 27, 2005, at 9:55 AM, Fred Drake wrote:
On 6/27/05, Ryan Tomayko email@example.com wrote:
On an almost related note, what should the MIME
type be for serving egg files via HTTP? It may be advantageous to use "application/zip" .
Yea, "application/zip" would be bad as it would clash with zip
handling applications, making it very unlikely that an egg handling
application could be provided as the default handler.
But what about "application/egg+zip"? If the "+foo" annotation is
doable, it would allow egg handling applications to be registered but
also allow fallback to zip handling applications when there is no egg
handling application available. I don't see the downside.
For a point of reference, Java's jar format is 'application/java- archive'.
I apologize for being cynical but, given Java's history of
disregarding/butchering web and internet architecture, I'd be
surprised if that was put in place by anyone having experience with
internet media types. Media types are like view source/HTML, it's
easy to miss the huge body of spec text dedicated to their behavior.
I really don't know the history of "application/java-archive" though,
so take that as an uninformed, biased, and probably a little unfair jab.
Ryan Tomayko firstname.lastname@example.org http://naeblis.cx/rtomayko/