Christoph Schneegans <Christoph@Schneegans.de>:
>
>   <object data="foo">
>     foo
>   </object>
>
> instead of
>
>   <object data="foo" type="image/png, image/jpg;q=0.9, image/gif;q=0.8">
>     foo
>   </object>
>
> and let the server do all the work?

Yes, when writing the previous mail, I wasn't quite sure what to insert in
the type attribute. I was close to use just "image/*", but wanted to
resemble the traditional nested code better.

You seem to have copy-and-pasted my error by the way, it's image/jpeg not
image/jpg.

I also wonder, whether e.g. "application/*+xml", "text/*ml" or "*/xml" was
legal. IIRC RFC 2616, it is not.