I believe that this is the idea of the XML WG and also the idea of W3C.
However, it is still not cleary presented in the XML PR.
Rick Jelliffe writes:
>I think I first suggested it, but it certainly was not my preferred
>option: I would prefer everything to be application/xml, because I do
>not like the idea of dumb HTTP/MIME systems fiddling and transcoding data,
>which they may do for text/xml. Application/xml is a binary transmission;
>no bits are molested en route.
You might want to try this once again in the XML SIG. If everybody agrees
on this, I am more than happy to agree. But I do not want to have
both text/xml and application/xml for HTTP, as this is likely to confuse
people. Is it possible to persuade people *not* to use text/xml?
Makoto
Fuji Xerox Information Systems
Tel: +81-44-812-7230 Fax: +81-44-812-7231
E-mail: murata@apsdc.ksp.fujixerox.co.jp