Hi Peter None of theme are approved, but according to the RFC, the text-tree is closest one when it comes down to properly describing the content. You put everything into "application" that is too specific or "does not fit into any of the other categories"
Kjell On 1/20/07, Peter Michaux <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 1/19/07, Kjell Bublitz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > While looking thru the brand new documentation i found myself > > stumbling upon the X-JSON header "again" as being suggested for > > automatic json evaluation within prototype. > > > > I must say that this approach is bad. We should evaluate on content > > type. It is simple to add and i wonder why no one else did it already. > > > > The content-type "text/x-json" is the closest acceptable description > > according to the RFCs and should be used by prototype to determine if > > evaluation is in order. Just like text/javascript, which is > > implemented already. > > Why "text/x-json" and not "application/json" which is the approved > JSON mime-type? > > Peter > -- > JavaScript for Rails: http://forkjavascript.org > > > > -- Kjell -- www.m3nt0r.de --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Ruby on Rails: Spinoffs" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/rubyonrails-spinoffs?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
