Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

Graham Klyne <GK@ninebynine.org> Tue, 08 November 2011 11:32 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 7E7BC21F84D6 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 03:32:23 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.566
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.566 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.011, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_03_06=0.044, 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 suH4LjYaMvzR for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 03:32:23 -0800 (PST)
Received: from relay9.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay9.mail.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.169]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D76A821F843E for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 03:32:22 -0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp2.mail.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.205]) by relay9.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RNjub-0000QR-UZ; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:32:17 +0000
Received: from tinos.zoo.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.24.47]) by smtp2.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <GK@ninebynine.org>) id 1RNjub-0006pZ-73; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 11:32:17 +0000
Message-ID: <4EB8E7FA.5030406@ninebynine.org>
Date: Tue, 08 Nov 2011 08:27:38 +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: Peter Saint-Andre <stpeter@stpeter.im>
References: <4EB86078.8070904@stpeter.im>
In-Reply-To: <4EB86078.8070904@stpeter.im>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Oxford-Username: zool0635
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] font/*
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, 08 Nov 2011 11:32:23 -0000

It's not clear to me what purpose would be served that cannot be handled 
perfectly adequately by application/*

My understanding (or impression over the years) was that the top-level MIME type 
was a kind of high-level dispatch indicator to a device capable of rendering or 
otherwise presenting the broad kind of content, with application/* serving for 
types that needed further processing before they might meaningfully be 
considered for presentation

If I receive a font/* file, what might I do with it that is different from any 
other application/* type of file?

#g
--


On 07/11/2011 22:49, Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
> In talking with folks at the W3C meeting last week, I heard yet again of
> interest in defining a Content Type for fonts. Would anyone active in
> the IETF Applications Area want to work on such a spec? And do folks
> here think a new top-level content type is needed for fonts?
>
> Peter
>