Appropriate Content-Type for Erlang Source

Steve Davis steven.charles.davis@REDACTED
Wed Dec 16 03:39:23 CET 2009

c uses text/plain or text/x-c
c++ uses text/plain
java uses text/plain or text/x-java-source it seems there's no real consensus. If I were asked I'd say
erlang is closest in purity and practical goals to c, so I'd probably
opt for
text/plain and text/erlang --- though it may be more useful to lobby
for binary erlang term format or ubf since these are designed for
network transfer. Since the term "bert" makes me squirm I'd probably
suggest application/etf or application/ubf for those two.


On Dec 15, 1:58 pm, Jayson Vantuyl <kag...@REDACTED> wrote:
> What's the appropriate content-type (i.e. MIME type) for Erlang source (and, for that matter, Erlang BEAM files)?
> I suspect the answer is text/plain (and application/octet-stream, respectively).
> That said, I'd prefer to have something more descriptive.  Maybe text/x-erlang (and application/x-beam-vm for starters.  For that matter, Erlang could apply to get an officially registered Content-Type.  For starters, it seems we could maybe get Debian to add an official mime-type for Erlang just by sending an e-mail (to mime-supp...@REDACTED apparently).  Is this appealing to anybody, or do I just have MIME on the brain?
> --
> Jayson Vantuyl
> kag...@REDACTED
> ________________________________________________________________
> erlang-questions mailing list. See
> erlang-questions (at)

More information about the erlang-questions mailing list