Re: [apps-discuss] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-seantek-text-markdown-use-cases-01.txt

Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> Fri, 09 January 2015 09:37 UTC

Return-Path: <gk@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 89E261A86E8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 01:37:55 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -4.2
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.2 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-2.3] autolearn=ham
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id pNOXGHyiD1OJ for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 01:37:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay16.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay16.mail.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.166]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 8C7DB1A86EB for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Fri, 9 Jan 2015 01:37:53 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay16.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1Y9W0t-0004wF-rM; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:37:51 +0000
Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=conina.atuin.ninebynine.org) by smtp4.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLS1.2:DHE_RSA_AES_128_CBC_SHA1:128) (Exim 4.80) (envelope-from <gk@ninebynine.org>) id 1Y9W0t-0008Sj-Dy; Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:37:51 +0000
Message-ID: <54AFA16F.9010801@ninebynine.org>
Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:37:51 +0000
From: Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.9; rv:31.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/31.3.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>
References: <20141228232409.13727.85741.idtracker@ietfa.amsl.com> <54A11093.1010100@seantek.com> <54A4200C.2040706@ninebynine.org> <CAL0qLwaFD2iQGgz5G5v0zEOzbEVj6y5abyCyEBORxaH0jSQ1BQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAL0qLwaFD2iQGgz5G5v0zEOzbEVj6y5abyCyEBORxaH0jSQ1BQ@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/05g1qN3rwSoYd3_eoPG2S_knPjQ>
Cc: IETF Apps Discuss <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Fwd: New Version Notification for draft-seantek-text-markdown-use-cases-01.txt
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: General discussion of application-layer protocols <apps-discuss.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/>
List-Post: <mailto:apps-discuss@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss>, <mailto:apps-discuss-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2015 09:37:55 -0000

On 09/01/2015 01:05, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 31, 2014 at 8:10 AM, Graham Klyne <gk@ninebynine.org> wrote:
>
>> I took a quick skim.  I'm not sure I find the background rationale
>> especially useful, and haven't reviewed it in detail (but I've no objection
>> to it - as if that mattered!).
>>
>
> Graham,
>
> Are you referring to Section 1 and perhaps Section 2 with that remark?  I
> believe we asked Sean to split out the registrations into a separate
> document, so that part seems to be okay for the moment.

I was referring to section 1.  Taken in isolation, my comment should not be 
regarded as any kind of blocker.

For me, the substantive part of the document is the registrations.  The rest 
might be useful to some, but I suspect that most people for whom this work is 
useful will already have their own experience of what Markdown is and how to use it.

As for splitting out the registrations, I'm assuming this draft *is* the 
separate document.  I thought there were differing opinions whether they should 
be in the main MIME type document of a separate informational document.  Either 
works for me.  I do seem to recall there was broader consensus to move the 
framing material (sections 1, 2 and maybe 4) out of the main document (YMMV). 
I've no objection to this document going forward in broadly its present form.

#g