Thomas Lotze wrote:
> Martijn Faassen wrote:
>> * zope.contenttype: we should analyze what is using zope.contenttype.
> Of the packages mentioned in ztk.cfg, zope.browserresource,
> and are. There's also zope.mimetype which seems to be
> concerned with the same subject and is used by zope.file and zope.html,
> and there's some MIME-type handling being done without using either
> zope.contenttype or zope.mimetype by zope.publisher and possibly others.
> Last time I looked, these different pieces of code didn't even treat
> content type declarations consistently nor correctly wrt the relevant RfC.
> I guess one might want to clean up this story as a whole.

Thanks for doing this analysis! It'd be great if you could turn this 
into a proposal for future actions...

I'm surprised about the difference in dependencies between zope.file and isn't zope.file an extracted version of If 
not, we need to think about that too.



Zope-Dev maillist  -
**  No cross posts or HTML encoding!  **
(Related lists - )

Reply via email to