Re: [apps-discuss] +exi (was: Re: type name suffixes)

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Wed, 16 November 2011 04:50 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
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 8B4CF1F0CA6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:50:31 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -104.885
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-104.885 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.286, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 sKxNt0fisym2 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:50:27 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net [216.86.168.183]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1BC041F0CB7 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 20:50:26 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [10.10.1.235] (unknown [12.14.58.130]) (using TLSv1 with cipher AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id CCFB450A64; Tue, 15 Nov 2011 23:50:24 -0500 (EST)
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1251.1)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <7ED2D66E-E262-4E6B-804D-4E11DACC899F@sensinode.com>
Date: Tue, 15 Nov 2011 22:50:24 -0600
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <64D06F72-1BCE-4B4B-80AB-415654F8365C@mnot.net>
References: <4EBBB0EE.8050502@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <01O88YVG6MQY00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EBCCE76.2090807@it.aoyama.ac.jp> <01O8AM6GDT5000RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EC0CCAE.5070402@stpeter.im> <01O8EWMK2T8E00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <4EC2DC42.7010307@stpeter.im> <01O8GE5O3B5K00RCTX@mauve.mrochek.com> <C68CB012D9182D408CED7B884F441D4D0611DAC31D@nambxv01a.corp.adobe.com> <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> <187EB539-B92A-4E65-BAF2-F18E01AC32F3@mnot.net> <7ED2D66E-E262-4E6B-804D-4E11DACC899F@sensinode.com>
To: Zach Shelby <zach@sensinode.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1251.1)
Cc: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] +exi (was: Re: type name suffixes)
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: Wed, 16 Nov 2011 04:50:31 -0000

On 15/11/2011, at 10:47 PM, Zach Shelby wrote:

> 
> On Nov 16, 2011, at 12:13 PM, Mark Nottingham wrote:
> 
>>> Besides, the current media type for EXI is application/exi. Thus it would make perfect sense to have +exi entries. Furthermore, EXI is totally different than gzip, which is a generic encoding that can be applied to anything. EXI can be applied only to XML objects, and in particular EXI is often used in a schema mode where it is only applicable to a single schema. Thus the form application/schema+exi makes even more sense, as that EXI format is actually specific to that particular schema and the media type tells you everything that is needed to decode the representation. 
>> 
>> These arguments were part of the discussion during EXI, and W3C decided to use a content-coding.
> 
> The W3C standard defines application/exi here 
> 
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2009/CR-exi-20091208/#mediaTypeRegistration


Yes, and they register the content coding right above that. 

Just because they registered a generic media type, it doesn't follow that automatically creating +exi media types for everything is a good idea.

--
Mark Nottingham
http://www.mnot.net/