Revisiting mime-types and file extensions
nichols7 at googlemail.com
Thu Jun 21 09:45:08 EDT 2007
Andrea Censi wrote:
>> Excellent, thank you very much; using fragment identifiers for versions
>> works for me. Andrea, would you be happy with
>> as profiles?
> OK for me.
> It's better with a final slash:
> so that it's easier to serve a document (rubyforge.org does not
> support multiviews).
Ok -- so your primary profile would be
and the current spec would have a profile of
is that correct?
This would allow us to chop the fragment identifier -- '#major.minor' --
from the end of a profile, and match it against
or similar. As a Ruby regex (I don't know Perl/PHP regex, it might
differ) this should I think give $2 as major and $3 as minor version for
the URIs we've discussed here. I'm assuming that version IDs will have a
standard major.minor.bugfix format and that we can disregard the third
element as irrelevant to the specification.
If we ever got energetic enough to implement all of this, we could then
create documents and mark them with mime-type of
and then when we later come to render them (perhaps on a different
system if the database has been dumped and reloaded) we'd be able to
decide whether this document can be safely rendered, or whether the user
should be warned that she needs to 'sudo gem install maruku' or perhaps
'sudo gem update maruku'. We could also allow her to specify 'vanilla
Markdown 1.0" as the syntax, in which case it could still be rendered on
systems which have only BlueCloth available.
This is enough for us to work with for now. For a 'standard' profile,
we'll be guided by John Gruber -- or if he has no objections, we'll use
More information about the Markdown-Discuss