Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-murata-kohn-lilley-xml-03

[Julian Reschke]

Chris Lilley wrote:
> On Friday, September 25, 2009, 1:52:02 PM, Julian wrote:
> 
> JR> Chris Lilley wrote:
>>> ...
>>> which also brings advice on the use of the charset parameter into line with current practice. In brief, the charset parameter should only be added if it agrees with the xml encoding declaration. In the absence of an explicit charset parameter, the encoding specified by the xml encoding declaration is used. (This is a change from RFC 3023, which required enforcing us-ascii in that case).
>>> ...
> 
> JR> Clarifying... this appears to apply only to application/xml, not 
> JR> text/xml, right?
> 
> Hi Julian,
> 
> Right - text/* is much more constrained here in terms of what can be fixed. 

Do you happen to have a summary why it actually cannot be changed? As 
far as I can tell almost everybody is ignoring this requirement anyway.

> So text/xml has not changed but also, is deprecated for that reason. My comment (slightly loose as a summary, perhaps) was in the context of application/xml and the non-text/*+xml types. 

But for those it's not a change from RFC3023, right?

BR, Julian