application/javascript mimetype not supported

[carlosmintfan]

It would be great if both text/javascript and application/javascript were supported!

[oscarotero]

application/javascript is considered obsolete. But I'm okay with supporting both types.
do you like to work on a PR?

[carlosmintfan]

Okay, but could take some days or a week until I do it. Are you sure application/javascript is the obsolete one though? ChatGPT told me the opposite.

[oscarotero]

Yes: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/876561/when-serving-javascript-files-is-it-better-to-use-the-application-javascript-or/876805#876805

Don't trust IAs for programming, go to reliable sources.

[carlosmintfan]

Wow, what a chaos – look at https://stackoverflow.com/posts/876805/revisions. The answer said text/javascript is obsolete, then it got edited. So apparently text/javascript was obsolete once, now it's recommended again. LOL.

[carlosmintfan]

Well, then, I thought about closing this out as I should use text/javascript anyway, BUT on my system (Linux Mint 21.3 based on Ubuntu Jammy), in PHP, mime_content_type('myjsfile.js') returns application/javascript! I'm curious whether this is fixed in newer Ubuntu versions – I'll check again when I upgrade to Linux Mint 22.1, but it seems we just need to support this for legacy compatibility that isn't the fault of developers that are able to change it, it is in the systems, in PHP or some Linux mime utility or whatever.

[carlosmintfan]

When right-clicking on a JS file in Nemo file manager (Cinnamon desktop environment), it says application/javascript likewise. So was the IETF's update really a good idea???

[oscarotero]

No idea, but it's a chaos indeed.

I'm okay with supporting both types for compatibility with obsolete sofware.
I think it could be addressed by changing the code to accept an array instead of a string for the mime types.

If you want to contribute, you're welcome. There's no rush, so take the time you need.
Thanks!