Simon McVittie dijo [Sun, Aug 29, 2021 at 03:13:02PM +0100]: > Using types outside text/ is definitely appropriate for very verbose text > languages like SVG and "flat" OpenDocument, where it's *technically* > text, and *technically* you could edit it with a text editor, but in > practice that's rarely what anyone wants. > > For scripting languages like sh and Python, I'm not sure: either way > could be appropriate. Which is more common: sharing scripts as source > code to read and edit, or sharing scripts as executables to download > and run as-is? If the former, text/ makes sense, if the latter, > application/.
I side with Paul Wise -- If a script is served by a Web server to a browser, I don't think the desired result will be to download and execute right away. text/* seems much better suited for me. Users willing to execute said scripts should download and execute locally -- and nobody should be bitten by the surprise of automatic (even after a UI acknowledgement) code execution of random Internet content.