Re: [apps-discuss] +exi

Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org> Sat, 17 December 2011 10:41 UTC

Return-Path: <carine@jay.w3.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 A913C21F8C04 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 02:41:12 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -10.133
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-10.133 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.134, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_33=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_HI=-8]
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 KqPHk3aK3VeI for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 02:41:12 -0800 (PST)
Received: from jay.w3.org (ssh.w3.org [128.30.52.60]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 34DC221F8BFE for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 02:41:11 -0800 (PST)
Received: from carine by jay.w3.org with local (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <carine@jay.w3.org>) id 1RbrhP-0005ZE-G4; Sat, 17 Dec 2011 05:41:03 -0500
Date: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 05:41:03 -0500
From: Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>
To: Zach Shelby <zach@sensinode.com>
Message-ID: <20111217104103.GP5525@jay.w3.org>
References: <4EC31F1E.6070304@stpeter.im> <8p86c7d6chvadsku6k5dhct20qkl7uk73l@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <4EC326FE.1010809@stpeter.im> <lu96c7hsl37325nn3184ub4vr88qjgja50@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <EDB50792-348B-4693-9FDF-04BA091F8BE9@sensinode.com> <4EE78F2F.2070601@stpeter.im> <20111213215816.GI5525@jay.w3.org> <5EFF390A-3D29-4F15-95BE-C81EFCF6D3D5@mnot.net> <20111214092327.GK5525@jay.w3.org> <7472087B-86F9-4683-BA74-F70EC98D483C@sensinode.com>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
In-Reply-To: <7472087B-86F9-4683-BA74-F70EC98D483C@sensinode.com>
User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.18 (2008-05-17)
Cc: paduffy@cisco.com, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Thomas Herbst <therbst@silverspringnet.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] +exi
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: Sat, 17 Dec 2011 10:41:12 -0000

On Fri, Dec 16, 2011 at 09:24:05AM +0200, Zach Shelby wrote:
> Right. It is exactly these kinds of applications that are using schema informed mode natively (without intermediate XML), where the application/foo+exi media type helps to determine this information out of band. When registering foo+exi, the schema information should be included in the registration.  In addition to SE2 mentioned so far, also our specification on SenML [http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jennings-senml-07] is requesting an application/senml+exi media type. Both of these media types are aimed at constrained embedded devices.


It seems that you could use application/foo and the content-encoding: exi
instead of registering a different media type. Is your application using a
protocol that has no content-encoding? or do you mean that you use a 
different schema for the exchange of a foo serialized in EXI than a 
text foo? A quick look at http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-jennings-senml-07 
makes me think it is the latter, for SenML. It does not seem a very nice
way to convey the schema information, SchemaId is meant to serve this 
purpose, not the media type. Since you need to carry other EXI options,
out-of-band or in the EXI header, why not using SchemaId?.


-- 
Carine Bournez -+- W3C Europe