Tim Bray wrote: > > On Jan 30, 2006, at 8:23 AM, James M Snell wrote: > >> +1. Serving atom up at application/xml is perfectly acceptable > > It is *not*. Atom has a registered Internet media type (application/ > atom+xml); using anything else is a bug. -Tim
I'm not sure I would stand on principle for that one if I were you. Xhtml also has a registered Internet media type (application/xhtml+xml), but many people (<grin>) serve up their xhtml pages as text/html. I'd like to take a survey of what web browsers will accept and what they indicate they prefer. http://www.intertwingly.net/wiki/pie/AcceptHeaders Based on the results, I will gladly start sending my feed at application/atom+xml to those browsers that *don't* indicate a preference for application/xml. As well as make a change to the Feed Validator to send such a header itself. - Sam Ruby
