Re: [apps-discuss] I-D Action: draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-00.txt

[[e-mail] (Henry S. Thompson)]

Further also to the recent review.

With my informal W3C TAG and XML Core WG hats on, I want to flag again
our concern about section 8:

8.  IANA Considerations

   See the Message Type Structured Syntax Suffix registration forms in
   Section 3 - Section 7.

   The existing Structured Syntax Suffix registration for "+xml"
   should be modified to include the following

   Fragment identifier considerations Media types using "+xml" SHOULD
                       process any fragment identifiers defined for
                       "application/xml" in the same way as defined
                       for that media type.  (At publication of this
                       document, the fragment identification syntax
                       considerations for "application/xml" are
                       defined in [RFC3023].) Specific media types
                       using "+xml" MAY identify additional fragment
                       identifier considerations, MAY define
                       processing for fragment identifiers that are
                       classed as errors for "application/xml" and MAY
                       designate fragment identifiers defined for
                       "application/xml" that SHOULD NOT be used.

RFC3023 does not, in fact, embarassingly, define a fragment
identifier syntax for application/xml documents, so this paragraph is
at best misleading.

Also, it's perhaps inappropriate to attempt to override-at-a-distance in
this way, given that this document obviously will not be documented as
superseding 3023.

The overall intent of this is clearly a Good Thing, but the timing is
tricky. . .

I will try to get some concrete information about the chances of a
getting a draft RFC intended to replace 3023 as a matter of urgency.

ht
-- 
       Henry S. Thompson, School of Informatics, University of Edinburgh
      10 Crichton Street, Edinburgh EH8 9AB, SCOTLAND -- (44) 131 650-4440
                Fax: [phone], e-mail: [e-mail]
                       URL: http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~ht/
 [mail from me _always_ has a .sig like this -- mail without it is forged spam]