Information provided by a website in an XML file is called an RSS feed. Followed by the 0.91 version that has been improved by the Userland company in 2000.
On the other hand, implementors and users of XML parsers tend to assume that the default charset is provided by the XML encoding declaration or BOM. There's a XML schema and/or DTD associated with the document.
An RSS-capable browser should be capable of recognizing RSS, RDF or ATOM data based on that.
You can vote for that bug in bugzilla if you find the save dialog to be annoying when you click on RSS feeds.I also hope that IE7 is will serve the rss related content-types as it would a text/xml doc by default. (apparently Robert Scoble will read your post if you put his name in it...) Tim Bray has pointed out why its important for people to get their act together: The default character set, which must be assumed in the absence of a charset parameter, is US-ASCII or ISO-8859-1 for all MIME types prefixed by text, depending of the Request for Comment you are considering.Likewise, the XML encoding marker or BOM is sufficient for determining whether RSS is properly formatted or not.Why should it be necessary to specify new, incompatible MIME types to solve problems that have already been solved within the XML files?
Additionally if aggregators are including Mozilla in their user agent, they will get .
The problem, however with the more descriptive content types is that Firefox and IE prompt you to download the XML file instead of displaying it in the browser like it would a I realize that this is not a perfect solution, it may cause browser plugins to have to do some extra work to determine if the document is an RSS, RDF or Atom Feed.