Re: [apps-discuss] Review of draft-levine-application-gzip-01.txt

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> Hi John,
> I am sorry I've missed this document earlier.

> I am generally happy that you wrote this draft and support its
> publication. Having said that, I think it needs some changes:

> In Section 1:

>     Some applications have informally used the media type application/
>     x-gzip.  The media types defined in this document should replace that
>     media type in future applications.

> Also I've seen application/x-gzip-compressed being mentioned on the web.

And application/gzip-compressed, application/gzipped, application/x-gunzip, and
probably a bunch of others.

> But I think it would be better to wait for
> draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs-04 to be submitted to IESG (it is in
> the APPSAWG WGLC now). That document would relax restrictions on
> registering x-* media types. I think your document should register media
> types already in use, as changing existing implementations to use
> application/gzip is hopeless at this point, unless there is some
> evidence that application/gzip is also in use. In the latter case
> aliasing mechanism proposed in draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs should
> be used.

I'm ambivalent about this in this case. There are simply too many names for
this media type in use; no matter which one we pick is cannot possibly conform
to all existing usage.

				Ned