You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@httpd.apache.org by Rob Hartill <ha...@ooo.lanl.gov> on 1995/12/06 22:57:00 UTC
application/x-dvi
Anyone know why the default mime type for dvi is
application/x-dvi
?
(as in mime.type)
Why is it treated differently (with the "x-") to postscript or pdf ?
rob
Re: application/x-dvi
Posted by Rob McCool <ro...@netscape.com>.
Rob Hartill wrote:
>
> Anyone know why the default mime type for dvi is
>
> application/x-dvi
>
> ?
>
> (as in mime.type)
>
> Why is it treated differently (with the "x-") to postscript or pdf ?
If it came from the list that comes with NCSA httpd, I got it from a
listing Tony Sanders put together. As I recall, at the time DVI didn't
have a registered type and the convention for making up new subtypes is
to prefix them with x-
--Rob
Re: application/x-dvi
Posted by "David M. Oliver" <da...@newshare.com>.
On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, Nathan Schrenk wrote:
> As I understand it, there are certain "standard" MIME types and subtypes
> as documented in RFC 1521. Any time you come up with a new type or subtype
> that isn't one of the standard documented MIME types, convention is to
> preface the identifier with "x-" to denote it as "experimental" or something.
> Since dvi is probably not listed in RFC 1521, it has a subtype of x-dvi
> instead of just dvi.
I thought I remembered something special about the type
"application" though. Maybe it was from the internet draft
not the RFC. I recall that since the type "application" is
virtually limitless in known and unknown sub-types, the x-
was not required. God, maybe I am all wet on this.
> This is also why the MIME type for server parsed html is
> text/x-server-parsed-html instead of text/server-parsed-html.
thanks for setting me straight on this Nathan
dmo
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| David Oliver dave@newshare.com |
| Managing Director-Technology Newshare Corporation |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
Re: application/x-dvi
Posted by Nathan Schrenk <ns...@neog.com>.
On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, David M. Oliver wrote:
> On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
>
> > Why is it treated differently (with the "x-") to postscript or pdf ?
>
> the name of the application is "xdvi" - no other reason I
> can think of to be honest.
>
> oh, unless within the type "application", the sub-type is
> an "extension". But, that's a dumb idea.
As I understand it, there are certain "standard" MIME types and subtypes
as documented in RFC 1521. Any time you come up with a new type or subtype
that isn't one of the standard documented MIME types, convention is to
preface the identifier with "x-" to denote it as "experimental" or something.
Since dvi is probably not listed in RFC 1521, it has a subtype of x-dvi
instead of just dvi.
This is also why the MIME type for server parsed html is
text/x-server-parsed-html instead of text/server-parsed-html.
Nathan
--
Nathan Schrenk nschrenk@neog.com
Neoglyphics Media Corp. http://www.neog.com/
Re: application/x-dvi
Posted by "David M. Oliver" <da...@newshare.com>.
On Wed, 6 Dec 1995, Rob Hartill wrote:
> Anyone know why the default mime type for dvi is
> application/x-dvi
>
yes this is what we use.
> Why is it treated differently (with the "x-") to postscript or pdf ?
the name of the application is "xdvi" - no other reason I
can think of to be honest.
oh, unless within the type "application", the sub-type is
an "extension". But, that's a dumb idea.
dmo
+------------------------------------------------------------------+
| David Oliver dave@newshare.com |
| Managing Director-Technology Newshare Corporation |
+------------------------------------------------------------------+