Scripting Media Types

[Bruce Lilly]

On Sun February 13 2005 14:10, ned.freed at mrochek.com wrote:

> You have previously claimed that people will only look at the list of
> registrations and not bother to look at the actual registrations. By this logic
> a discussion of unregistered types buried in the text for some other type isn't
> going to be seen.

Yes.
 
> You can't have it both ways. And please don't bother claiming that
> the lack of a registration for these text types will serve as a warning
> not to use them

By itself, it won't serve as a warning.  The problem is that there
is no visible, clear place to provide a warning.  If somebody
(typically a developer) is looking for an appropriate type and sees
application/ecmascript and application/javascript, he is likely to
use one of those.  If text/javascript etc. are also registered and
he sees one of those first, that's what he's likely to use.  The
latter is what we would like to avoid.