DISPATCH                                                       M. Miller
Internet-Draft
Obsoletes: 4329 (if approved)                                  M. Borins
Intended status: Informational                                    GitHub
Expires: 18 July 2022                                          M. Bynens
                                                                  Google
                                                               B. Farias
                                                         14 January 2022


                     ECMAScript Media Types Updates
                 draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-14

Abstract

   This document describes the registration of media types for the
   ECMAScript and JavaScript programming languages and conformance
   requirements for implementations of these types.  This document
   obsoletes RFC4329, "Scripting Media Types", replacing the previous
   registrations for "text/javascript" and "application/javascript" with
   information and requirements aligned with implementation experiences.

Status of This Memo

   This Internet-Draft is submitted in full conformance with the
   provisions of BCP 78 and BCP 79.

   Internet-Drafts are working documents of the Internet Engineering
   Task Force (IETF).  Note that other groups may also distribute
   working documents as Internet-Drafts.  The list of current Internet-
   Drafts is at https://datatracker.ietf.org/drafts/current/.

   Internet-Drafts are draft documents valid for a maximum of six months
   and may be updated, replaced, or obsoleted by other documents at any
   time.  It is inappropriate to use Internet-Drafts as reference
   material or to cite them other than as "work in progress."

   This Internet-Draft will expire on 18 July 2022.

Copyright Notice

   Copyright (c) 2022 IETF Trust and the persons identified as the
   document authors.  All rights reserved.

   This document is subject to BCP 78 and the IETF Trust's Legal
   Provisions Relating to IETF Documents (https://trustee.ietf.org/
   license-info) in effect on the date of publication of this document.
   Please review these documents carefully, as they describe your rights



Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 1]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   and restrictions with respect to this document.  Code Components
   extracted from this document must include Revised BSD License text as
   described in Section 4.e of the Trust Legal Provisions and are
   provided without warranty as described in the Revised BSD License.

Table of Contents

   1.  Introduction  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   2
     1.1.  Terminology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   2.  Compatibility . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   3.  Modules . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   3
   4.  Encoding  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   4
     4.1.  Charset Parameter . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.2.  Character Encoding Scheme Detection . . . . . . . . . . .   5
     4.3.  Character Encoding Scheme Error Handling  . . . . . . . .   6
   5.  Security Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   6
   6.  IANA Considerations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .   9
     6.1.  Common JavaScript Media Types . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
       6.1.1.  text/javascript . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  10
     6.2.  Historic JavaScript Media Types . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
       6.2.1.  text/ecmascript . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  11
   7.  References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     7.1.  Normative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  12
     7.2.  Informative References  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  13
   Appendix A.  Acknowledgements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Appendix B.  Changes from RFC 4329  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  14
   Authors' Addresses  . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .  15

1.  Introduction

   This memo describes media types for the JavaScript and ECMAScript
   programming languages.  Refer to the sections "Introduction" and
   "Overview" in [ECMA-262] for background information on these
   languages.  This document updates the descriptions and registrations
   for these media types to reflect existing usage on the Internet, and
   provides up-to-date security considerations.

   This document replaces the media types registrations in [RFC4329],
   and updates the requirements for implementations using those media
   types defined in [RFC4329] based on current existing practices.  As a
   consequence, this document obsoletes [RFC4329].










Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 2]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


1.1.  Terminology

   The key words "MUST", "MUST NOT", "REQUIRED", "SHALL", "SHALL NOT",
   "SHOULD", "SHOULD NOT", "RECOMMENDED", "NOT RECOMMENDED", "MAY", and
   "OPTIONAL" in this document are to be interpreted as described in BCP
   14 [RFC2119] [RFC8174] when, and only when, they appear in all
   capitals, as shown here.

2.  Compatibility

   This document defines equivalent processing requirements for the
   types text/javascript, text/ecmascript, and application/javascript.
   The most widely supported media type in use is text/javascript; all
   others are considered historical and obsolete aliases of text/
   javascript.

   The types defined in this document are applicable to scripts written
   in [ECMA-262].  Later editions of [ECMA-262] are not directly
   addressed, although it is expected that implementations will behave
   as if applicability were extended to them.  This document does not
   address other extensions to [ECMA-262] or scripts written in other
   languages.

   This document may be updated to take other content into account.
   Updates of this document may introduce new optional parameters;
   implementations MUST consider the impact of such an update.

   This document does not define how fragment identifiers in resource
   identifiers ([RFC3986], [RFC3987]) for documents labeled with one of
   the media types defined in this document are resolved.  An update of
   this document may define processing of fragment identifiers.

   The definitions in this document reflect the current state of
   implementation across the JavaScript ecosystem, in web browsers and
   other environments such as Node.js alike, in order to guarantee
   backwards compatibility with existing applications as much as
   possible.

3.  Modules

   In order to formalize support for modular programs, [ECMA-262]
   (starting with 6th Edition) defines two top-level goal symbols (or
   roots to the abstract syntax tree) for the ECMAScript grammar: Module
   and Script.  The Script goal represents the original structure where
   the code executes in the global scope, while the Module goal
   represents the module system built into ECMAScript starting with 6th
   Edition.  See the section "ECMAScript Language: Scripts and Modules"
   of [ECMA-262] for details.



Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 3]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   This separation means that (in the absence of additional information)
   there are two possible interpretations for any given ECMAScript
   source text.

   Ecma International's Technical Committee 39 (TC39), the standards
   body in charge of ECMAScript, has determined that media types are
   outside of their scope of work [TC39-MIME-ISSUE].

   It is not possible to fully determine if a source text of ECMAScript
   is meant to be parsed using the Module or Script grammar goals based
   upon content or media type alone.  Therefore, as permitted by the
   media types in this document, scripting environments use out-of-band
   information in order to determine what goal should be used.  Some
   scripting environments have chosen to adopt the file extension of
   .mjs for this purpose.

4.  Encoding

   Refer to [RFC6365] for a discussion of terminology used in this
   section.  Source text (as defined in [ECMA-262], section "Source
   Text") can be binary source text.  Binary source text is a textual
   data object that represents source text encoded using a character
   encoding scheme.  A textual data object is a whole text protocol
   message or a whole text document, or a part of it, that is treated
   separately for purposes of external storage and retrieval.  An
   implementation's internal representation of source text is not
   considered binary source text.

   Implementations need to determine a character encoding scheme in
   order to decode binary source text to source text.  The media types
   defined in this document allow an optional charset parameter to
   explicitly specify the character encoding scheme used to encode the
   source text.

   How implementations determine the character encoding scheme can be
   subject to processing rules that are out of the scope of this
   document.  For example, transport protocols can require that a
   specific character encoding scheme is to be assumed if the optional
   charset parameter is not specified, or they can require that the
   charset parameter is used in certain cases.  Such requirements are
   not defined by this document.










Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 4]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   Implementations that support binary source text MUST support binary
   source text encoded using the UTF-8 [RFC3629] character encoding
   scheme.  Module goal sources MUST be encoded as UTF-8, all other
   encodings will fail.  Source goal sources SHOULD be encoded as UTF-8;
   other character encoding schemes MAY be supported, but are
   discouraged.  Whether U+FEFF is processed as a Byte Order Mark (BOM)
   signature or not depends on the host environment, and is not defined
   by this document.

4.1.  Charset Parameter

   The charset parameter provides a means to specify the character
   encoding scheme of binary source text.  Its value SHOULD be a
   registered charset [CHARSETS], and is considered valid if it matches
   the mime-charset production defined in [RFC2978], section 2.3.

   The charset parameter is only used when processing a Script goal
   source; Module goal sources MUST always be processed as UTF-8.

4.2.  Character Encoding Scheme Detection

   It is possible that implementations cannot interoperably determine a
   single character encoding scheme simply by complying with all
   requirements of the applicable specifications.  To foster
   interoperability in such cases, the following algorithm is defined.
   Implementations apply this algorithm until a single character
   encoding scheme is determined.

   1.  If the binary source text is not already determined to be using a
       Module goal and starts with a Unicode encoding form signature,
       the signature determines the encoding.  The following octet
       sequences, at the very beginning of the binary source text, are
       considered with their corresponding character encoding schemes:

       +------------------+----------+
       | Leading sequence | Encoding |
       |------------------+----------|
       | EF BB BF         | UTF-8    |
       | FF FE            | UTF-16LE |
       | FE FF            | UTF-16BE |
       +------------------+----------+

       Implementations of this step MUST use these octet sequences to
       determine the character encoding scheme, even if the determined
       scheme is not supported.  If this step determines the character
       encoding scheme, the octet sequence representing the Unicode
       encoding form signature MUST be ignored when decoding the binary
       source text.



Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 5]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   2.  Else, if a charset parameter is specified and its value is valid
       and supported by the implementation, the value determines the
       character encoding scheme.

   3.  Else, the character encoding scheme is assumed to be UTF-8.

   If the character encoding scheme is determined to be UTF-8 through
   any means other than step 1 as defined above and the binary source
   text starts with the octet sequence EF BB BF, the octet sequence is
   ignored when decoding the binary source text.

4.3.  Character Encoding Scheme Error Handling

   Binary source text that is not properly encoded for the determined
   character encoding can pose a security risk, as discussed in section
   5.  That said, because of the varied and complex environments scripts
   are executed in, most of the error handling specifics are left to the
   processors.  The following are broad guidelines that processors
   follow.

   If binary source text is determined to have been encoded using a
   certain character encoding scheme that the implementation is unable
   to process, implementations can consider the resource unsupported
   (i.e., do not decode the binary source text using a different
   character encoding scheme).

   Binary source text can be determined to have been encoded using a
   certain character encoding scheme but contain octet sequences that
   are not valid according to that scheme.  Implementations can
   substitute those invalid sequences with the replacement character
   U+FFFD (properly encoded for the scheme), or stop processing
   altogether.

5.  Security Considerations

   Refer to [RFC3552] for a discussion of terminology used in this
   section.  Examples in this section and discussions of interactions of
   host environments with scripts, modules, and extensions to [ECMA-262]
   are to be understood as non-exhaustive and of a purely illustrative
   nature.

   The programming language defined in [ECMA-262] is not intended to be
   computationally self-sufficient, rather, it is expected that the
   computational environment provides facilities to programs to enable
   specific functionality.  Such facilities constitute unknown factors
   and are thus not defined by this document.





Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 6]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   Derived programming languages are permitted to include additional
   functionality that is not described in [ECMA-262]; such functionality
   constitutes an unknown factor and is thus not defined by this
   document.  In particular, extensions to [ECMA-262] defined for the
   JavaScript programming language are not discussed in this document.

   Uncontrolled execution of scripts can be exceedingly dangerous.
   Implementations that execute scripts MUST give consideration to their
   application's threat models and those of the individual features they
   implement; in particular, they MUST ensure that untrusted content is
   not executed in an unprotected environment.

   Module scripts in ECMAScript can request the fetching and processing
   of additional scripts, called importing.  Implementations that
   support modules need to process imported sources in the same way as
   scripts.  See the section "ECMAScript Language: Scripts and Modules"
   in [ECMA-262] for details.  Further, there may be additional privacy
   and security concerns depending on the location(s) the original
   script and its imported modules are obtained from.  For instance, a
   script obtained from "host-a.example" could request to import a
   script from "host-b.example", which could expose information about
   the executing environment (e.g., IP address) to "host-b.example".

   Specifications for host environment facilities and for derived
   programming languages should include security considerations.  If an
   implementation supports such facilities, the respective security
   considerations apply.  In particular, if scripts can be referenced
   from or included in specific document formats, the considerations for
   the embedding or referencing document format apply.

   For example, scripts embedded in application/xhtml+xml [RFC3236]
   documents could be enabled through the host environment to manipulate
   the document instance, which could cause the retrieval of remote
   resources; security considerations regarding retrieval of remote
   resources of the embedding document would apply in this case.

   This circumstance can further be used to make information, that is
   normally only available to the script, available to a web server by
   encoding the information in the resource identifier of the resource,
   which can further enable eavesdropping attacks.  Implementation of
   such facilities is subject to the security considerations of the host
   environment, as discussed above.









Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 7]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   The programming language defined in [ECMA-262] does include
   facilities to loop, cause computationally complex operations, or
   consume large amounts of memory; this includes, but is not limited
   to, facilities that allow dynamically generated source text to be
   executed (e.g., the eval() function); uncontrolled execution of such
   features can cause denial of service, which implementations MUST
   protect against.

   With the addition of SharedArrayBuffer objects in ECMAScript version
   8, it could be possible to implement a high-resolution timer which
   could lead to certain types of timing and side-channel attacks (e.g.,
   [SPECTRE]).  Implementations can take steps to mitigate this concern,
   such as disabling or removing support for SharedArrayBuffer objects,
   or take additional steps to ensure access to this shared memory is
   only accessible between execution contexts that have some form of
   mutual trust.

   A host environment can provide facilities to access external input.
   Scripts that pass such input to the eval() function or similar
   language features can be vulnerable to code injection attacks.
   Scripts are expected to protect against such attacks.

   A host environment can provide facilities to output computed results
   in a user-visible manner.  For example, host environments supporting
   a graphical user interface can provide facilities that enable scripts
   to present certain messages to the user.  Implementations MUST take
   steps to avoid confusion of the origin of such messages.  In general,
   the security considerations for the host environment apply in such a
   case as discussed above.

   Implementations are required to support the UTF-8 character encoding
   scheme; the security considerations of [RFC3629] apply.  Additional
   character encoding schemes may be supported; support for such schemes
   is subject to the security considerations of those schemes.

   Source text is expected to be in Unicode Normalization Form C.
   Scripts and implementations MUST consider security implications of
   unnormalized source text and data.  For a detailed discussion of such
   implications refer to the security considerations in [RFC3629].

   Scripts can be executed in an environment that is vulnerable to code
   injection attacks.  For example, a CGI script [RFC3875] echoing user
   input could allow the inclusion of untrusted scripts that could be
   executed in an otherwise trusted environment.  This threat scenario
   is subject to security considerations that are out of the scope of
   this document.





Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 8]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   The "data" resource identifier scheme [RFC2397], in combination with
   the types defined in this document, could be used to cause execution
   of untrusted scripts through the inclusion of untrusted resource
   identifiers in otherwise trusted content.  Security considerations of
   [RFC2397] apply.

   Implementations can fail to implement a specific security model or
   other means to prevent possibly dangerous operations.  Such failure
   could possibly be exploited to gain unauthorized access to a system
   or sensitive information; such failure constitutes an unknown factor
   and is thus not defined by this document.

6.  IANA Considerations

   The media type registrations herein are divided into two major
   categories: the sole media type "text/javascript" which is now in
   common usage, and all of the media types that are obsolete.

   For both categories, the media types are updated to reference
   [ECMA-262].  In addition, a new file extension of .mjs is added to
   the list of file extensions with the restriction that contents should
   be parsed using the Module goal.  Finally, the [HTML] specification
   uses "text/javascript" as the default media type of ECMAScript when
   preparing script tags; therefore, "text/javascript" intended usage is
   to be moved from OBSOLETE to COMMON.

   These changes are to be reflected in the IANA Media Types registry in
   accordance with [RFC6838].  All registrations will point to this
   document as reference.  The outdated note stating that the "text/
   javascript" media type has been "OBSOLETED in favor of application/
   javascript" is to be removed.  The outdated note stating that the
   "text/ecmascript" media type has been "OBSOLETED in favor of
   application/ecmascript" is to be removed.  IANA is requested to add
   the note "OBSOLETED in favor of text/javascript" to all registrations
   except "text/javascript".

   Four of the legacy media types in this document have a subtype
   starting with the "x-" prefix:

   *  application/x-ecmascript

   *  application/x-javascript

   *  text/x-ecmascript

   *  text/x-javascript





Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                  [Page 9]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   Note that these are grandfathered media types registered as per
   Appendix A of [RFC6838].

6.1.  Common JavaScript Media Types

6.1.1.  text/javascript

   Type name:  text

   Subtype name:  javascript

   Required parameters:  N/A

   Optional parameters:  charset, see section 4.1 of [this document].

   Encoding considerations:  Binary

   Security considerations:  See section 5 of [this document].

   Interoperability considerations:  It is expected that implementations
      will behave as if this registration applies to later editions of
      [ECMA-262], and its published specification references may be
      updated accordingly from time to time.  See also various sections
      of [this document].

   Published specification:  [ECMA-262]

   Applications which use this media type:  Script interpreters as
      discussed in [this document].

   Additional information:

   Deprecated alias names for this type:  application/javascript,
      application/x-javascript, text/javascript1.0, text/javascript1.1,
      text/javascript1.2, text/javascript1.3, text/javascript1.4, text/
      javascript1.5, text/jscript, text/livescript

      Magic number(s):  n/a

      File extension(s):  .js, .mjs

      Macintosh File Type Code(s):  TEXT

   Person & email address to contact for further information:  See
      Author's Address section of [this document] and [RFC4329].

   Intended usage:  COMMON




Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 10]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   Restrictions on usage:  The .mjs file extension signals that the file
      represents a JavaScript module.  Execution environments that rely
      on file extensions to determine how to process inputs parse .mjs
      files using the Module grammar of [ECMA-262].

   Author:  See Author's Address section of [this document] and
      [RFC4329].

   Change controller:  IESG <iesg@ietf.org>

6.2.  Historic JavaScript Media Types

   The following media types and legacy aliases are added or updated for
   historical purposes.  All herein have an intended usage of OBSOLETE,
   and are not expected to be in use with modern implementations.

6.2.1.  text/ecmascript

   Type name:  application

   Subtype name:  ecmascript

   Required parameters:  N/A

   Optional parameters:  charset, see section 4.1 of [this document].

   Encoding considerations:  Binary

   Security considerations:  See section 5 of [this document].

   Interoperability considerations:  It is expected that implementations
      will behave as if this registration applies to later editions of
      [ECMA-262], and its published specification references may be
      updated accordingly from time to time.  See also various sections
      of [this document].

   Published specification:  [ECMA-262]

   Applications which use this media type:  Script interpreters as
      discussed in [this document].

   Additional information:

   Deprecated alias names for this type:  application/ecmascript,
      application/x-ecmascript, text/x-ecmascript

   Magic number(s):  n/a




Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 11]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   File extension(s):  .es, .mjs

   Macintosh File Type Code(s):  TEXT

   Person & email address to contact for further information:  See
      Author's Address section of [this document] and [RFC4329].

   Intended usage:  OBSOLETE

   Restrictions on usage:  This media type is obsolete; current
      implementations should use text/javascript as the only JavaScript/
      ECMAScript media type.  The .mjs file extension signals that the
      file represents a JavaScript module.  Execution environments that
      rely on file extensions to determine how to process inputs parse
      .mjs files using the Module grammar of [ECMA-262].

   Author:  See Author's Address section of [this document] and
      [RFC4329].

   Change controller:  IESG <iesg@ietf.org>

7.  References

7.1.  Normative References

   [CHARSETS] IANA, "Assigned character sets", n.d.,
              <https://www.iana.org/assignments/character-sets>.

   [ECMA-262] Ecma International, "ECMAScript 2021 language
              specification, ECMA-262 12th Edition, June 2021", June
              2021, <https://262.ecma-international.org/12.0/>.

   [RFC2119]  Bradner, S., "Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate
              Requirement Levels", BCP 14, RFC 2119,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2119, March 1997,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2119>.

   [RFC2397]  Masinter, L., "The "data" URL scheme", RFC 2397,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC2397, August 1998,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2397>.

   [RFC2978]  Freed, N. and J. Postel, "IANA Charset Registration
              Procedures", BCP 19, RFC 2978, DOI 10.17487/RFC2978,
              October 2000, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc2978>.







Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 12]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   [RFC3552]  Rescorla, E. and B. Korver, "Guidelines for Writing RFC
              Text on Security Considerations", BCP 72, RFC 3552,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC3552, July 2003,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3552>.

   [RFC3629]  Yergeau, F., "UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO
              10646", STD 63, RFC 3629, DOI 10.17487/RFC3629, November
              2003, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3629>.

   [RFC4329]  Hoehrmann, B., "Scripting Media Types", RFC 4329,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC4329, April 2006,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc4329>.

   [RFC6365]  Hoffman, P. and J. Klensin, "Terminology Used in
              Internationalization in the IETF", BCP 166, RFC 6365,
              DOI 10.17487/RFC6365, September 2011,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6365>.

   [RFC6838]  Freed, N., Klensin, J., and T. Hansen, "Media Type
              Specifications and Registration Procedures", BCP 13,
              RFC 6838, DOI 10.17487/RFC6838, January 2013,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc6838>.

   [RFC8174]  Leiba, B., "Ambiguity of Uppercase vs Lowercase in RFC
              2119 Key Words", BCP 14, RFC 8174, DOI 10.17487/RFC8174,
              May 2017, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc8174>.

7.2.  Informative References

   [HTML]     WHATWG, "HTML Living Standard", August 2017,
              <https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/
              scripting.html#prepare-a-script>.

   [RFC3236]  Baker, M. and P. Stark, "The 'application/xhtml+xml' Media
              Type", RFC 3236, DOI 10.17487/RFC3236, January 2002,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3236>.

   [RFC3875]  Robinson, D. and K. Coar, "The Common Gateway Interface
              (CGI) Version 1.1", RFC 3875, DOI 10.17487/RFC3875,
              October 2004, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3875>.

   [RFC3986]  Berners-Lee, T., Fielding, R., and L. Masinter, "Uniform
              Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax", STD 66,
              RFC 3986, DOI 10.17487/RFC3986, January 2005,
              <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3986>.






Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 13]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


   [RFC3987]  Duerst, M. and M. Suignard, "Internationalized Resource
              Identifiers (IRIs)", RFC 3987, DOI 10.17487/RFC3987,
              January 2005, <https://www.rfc-editor.org/info/rfc3987>.

   [SPECTRE]  Kocher, P., Fogh, A., Gerkin, D., Gruss, D., Haas, W.,
              Hamburg, M., Lipp, M., Mangard, S., Prescher, T., Schwarz,
              M., and Y. Yarom, "Spectre Attacks: Exploiting Speculative
              Execution", January 2018,
              <https://arxiv.org/abs/1801.01203>.

   [TC39-MIME-ISSUE]
              TC39, "Add `application/javascript+module` mime to remove
              ambiguity", August 2017, <https://web.archive.org/web/2017
              0814193912/https://github.com/tc39/ecma262/issues/322>.

Appendix A.  Acknowledgements

   This work builds upon its antecedent document, authored by Bjoern
   Hoehrmann.  The authors would like to thank Adam Roach, Alexey
   Melnikov, Allen Wirfs-Brock, Anne van Kesteren, Ben Campbell,
   Benjamin Kaduk, Eric Vyncke, Francesca Palombini, James Snell, Kirsty
   Paine, Mark Nottingham, Murray Kucherawy, Ned Freed, Robert Sparks,
   and Suresh Krishnan for their guidance and feedback throughout this
   process.

Appendix B.  Changes from RFC 4329

   *  Added a section discussing ECMAScript modules and the impact on
      processing.

   *  Updated the Security Considerations to discuss concerns associated
      with ECMAScript modules and SharedArrayBuffers.

   *  Updated the character encoding scheme detection to remove
      normative guidance on its use, to better reflect operational
      reality.

   *  Changed the intended usage of the media type text/javascript from
      obsolete to common.

   *  Changed the intended usage for all other script media types to
      obsolete.

   *  Updated various references where the original has been obsoleted.

   *  Updated references to ECMA-262 to match the version at time of
      publication.




Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 14]


Internet-Draft       ECMAScript Media Types Updates         January 2022


Authors' Addresses

   Matthew A. Miller

   Email: linuxwolf+ietf@outer-planes.net


   Myles Borins
   GitHub

   Email: mylesborins@github.com


   Mathias Bynens
   Google

   Email: mths@google.com


   Bradley Farias

   Email: bradley.meck@gmail.com





























Miller, et al.            Expires 18 July 2022                 [Page 15]