Re: [Anima] [media-types] Fwd: Thoughts on suffixes, single and multiple

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Michael,
At 01:21 PM 04-04-2024, Michael Richardson wrote:
>We in ANIMA have been struggling because we have an artifact, a voucher
>(YANG defined in RFC8366, being revised/extended in 8366bis), which can be in
>two major formats: JSON and CBOR (in theory, XML too), but can be signed by
>three formats (CMS, JWS, COSE).
>
>That gives us three major variations today:
>1) application/voucher-cms+json  aka voucher+json+cms?
>2) application/voucher+cose      or? voucher+cbor+cose?
>3) application/voucher-jwt+json  aka voucher+json+jwt?
>
>(because CMS signing CBOR seems dumb, as does mixing {JSON,CBOR} X {JWS,COSE})
>
>We didn't know if we should resort to multiple suffixes or not, and the lack
>of apparent progress on this has been a pain.  So, thank you for the decision
>as it takes the options off the table, I guess, even if I'm bit surprised by
>it.

My quick reaction is that using those variations is a bad idea.  The 
good news is that I cannot prevent the working group from moving 
forward with the registration.

The policy perspective is that someone will have to go through the 
registry, submit a policy change and figure out how to move it forward.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy