Re: [apps-discuss] A modest proposal for MIME types (and URI schemes)

Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> Tue, 15 November 2011 08:32 UTC

Return-Path: <GK@ninebynine.org>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 3338121F8D7A for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:32:03 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.524
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.524 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.075, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4]
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YcMLlC4KflXZ for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:32:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay2.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay2.mail.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.161]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 9336121F8D74 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 00:32:02 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.mail.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.205]) by relay2.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RQEQt-00074X-6r; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:31:55 +0000
Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=Eskarina.local) by smtp2.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RQEQs-00056m-8w; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:31:55 +0000
Message-ID: <4EC21CCD.3040808@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:03:25 +0000
From: Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
References: <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D0611DABF22@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <4EC0BE9E.8020702@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <CAK3OfOiEfX3duaWSAZZ9T+pb9UofceH_xXW2SCBnyjLHeHHe4Q@mail.gmail.com> <01O8ETX0DJ4U00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <CAK3OfOiWmYxbANidbMiT3aJ6ES=mc0Gi_vvMB3bw-eQvaTcQQA@mail.gmail.com> <01O8EXP3E5XQ00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01O8EXP3E5XQ00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Cc: Roy Fielding <fielding@adobe.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] A modest proposal for MIME types (and URI schemes)
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
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: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 08:32:03 -0000

On 14/11/2011 22:50, Ned Freed wrote:
> This assumes that currently there's significant cost associated with collision
> checks. I can't speak to other registries, but I can assure you the amount
> of time spent on this in the case of media types is truly negligable.

Similarly for header fields and URI schemes.

In practice, I think submitters check this in their own interest.  Completeness 
of the registry could help here.

On this point, I think it's sensible to discourage collision, but not to insist 
on uniqueness in every case.

#g
--