Text/javascript vs application/javascript

我很好奇 MIME 类型 application/javascript和 text/javascript的语义。

除了显而易见的——一个是用来执行的，另一个是文本。

在查看外部.js 加载的标头时，我看到了 application/javascript。

HTTP/1.1 200 OK
Date: Mon, 13 Jan 2014 18:32:58 GMT
Server: Apache/2.2.22 (Unix) mod_ssl/2.2.22 OpenSSL/0.9.8e-fips-rhel5
Content-Type: application/javascript
Content-Length: 856
keep-alive: timeout=5, max=59
Via: 1.1 (jetty)
Accept-Ranges: bytes

如果这个 application/javascript将执行 javascript，为什么我们不使用

<script type="application/javascript">
// some js code.
</script>

反之亦然，为什么外部 js 负载不是 text/javascript？

77273

小开

最佳答案

Per IETF RFC 9239 text/javascript is now standard and application/javascript is now considered obsolete.

The media type registrations herein are divided into two major categories: (1) the sole media type "text/javascript", which is now in common usage and (2) all of the media types that are obsolete (i.e., "application/ecmascript", "application/javascript", "application/x-ecmascript", "application/ x-javascript", "text/ecmascript", "text/javascript1.0", "text/javascript1.1", "text/javascript1.2", "text/ javascript1.3", "text/javascript1.4", "text/javascript1.5", "text/jscript", "text/livescript", and "text/xecmascript").

See further notes in When serving JavaScript files, is it better to use the application/javascript or application/x-javascript