Re: [apps-discuss] Getting 3023bis, a.k.a. draft-ietf-appsawg-xml-mediatypes, moving

Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com> Wed, 01 May 2013 20:53 UTC

Return-Path: <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
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 192EC21F99D8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 May 2013 13:53:51 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.599
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.599 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599]
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 W1+zPe304r7y for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Wed, 1 May 2013 13:53:47 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com (mauve.mrochek.com [66.59.230.40]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E904D21F99D6 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Wed, 1 May 2013 13:53:46 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from dkim-sign.mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01OT4UR2EZTC0056F6@mauve.mrochek.com> for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Wed, 1 May 2013 13:48:40 -0700 (PDT)
MIME-version: 1.0
Content-type: TEXT/PLAIN; CHARSET=iso-8859-1
Received: from mauve.mrochek.com by mauve.mrochek.com (PMDF V6.1-1 #35243) id <01OT3BOFFH80000054@mauve.mrochek.com>; Wed, 1 May 2013 13:48:32 -0700 (PDT)
Message-id: <01OT4UQWYK5M000054@mauve.mrochek.com>
Date: Wed, 01 May 2013 13:44:47 -0700 (PDT)
From: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-reply-to: "Your message dated Wed, 01 May 2013 11:13:16 +0100" <f5bzjwf57pf.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
References: <f5b38u89jiz.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk> <1CD55F04538DEA4F85F3ADF7745464AF249DAECA@S-BSC-MBX1.nrn.nrcan.gc.ca> <f5bzjwf57pf.fsf@calexico.inf.ed.ac.uk>
To: ht@inf.ed.ac.uk
Cc: "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Getting 3023bis, a.k.a. draft-ietf-appsawg-xml-mediatypes, moving
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, 01 May 2013 20:53:51 -0000

> Rushforth, Peter writes:

> > Section 8.
> >
> > Suggest to remove the recommendation to register media types with +xml
> > suffix.  Suggest to add recommendation for a 'profile' parameter for application/xml,
> > as is being done for atom : http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-wilde-atom-profile-01

> I have to say I'm not inclined to go that way.  There is a _very_
> large installed base, particularly of application/xhtml+xml and
> application/rdf+xml.  There are around 100 registered
> application/xxx+xml media types registered _outside_ the
> vnd... sub-space, and another 200 or so there.  We recently spent a
> lot of time getting both the general approach to registering
> structured suffixes and their uses [1] and using that approach to
> clean up / document existing practices [2], including the +xml case.

> Introducing an alternative profile-based approach at this point would
> just confuse things, IMO.

I strongly agree. We're currently seeing a large number of registrations
coming in and momentum seems to be building. The absolute last thing we should
be doing is making changes that break that. We have seen the effect of such
changes in the past; it was not good.

				Ned