IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-seantek-text-markdown-media-type

"John Levine" <johnl@taugh.com> Mon, 21 July 2014 19:50 UTC

Return-Path: <johnl@iecc.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CB1B91A03C8 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: 0.762
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=0.762 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_20=-0.001, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, HELO_MISMATCH_COM=0.553, HOST_MISMATCH_NET=0.311, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O2xiuy1RdIVq for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:50:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (abusenet-1-pt.tunnel.tserv4.nyc4.ipv6.he.net [IPv6:2001:470:1f06:1126::2]) (using TLSv1 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id DDE741A03CB for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Mon, 21 Jul 2014 12:50:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 94756 invoked from network); 21 Jul 2014 19:50:52 -0000
Received: from miucha.iecc.com (64.57.183.18) by mail1.iecc.com with QMQP; 21 Jul 2014 19:50:52 -0000
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=iecc.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=1e70.53cd6f1e.k1407; i=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=T75CKfBv587oNajucqLSTxXR1QNWLPVUgzPQIO6pzwA=; b=T5tZwjUqVD2Qhlj+WBX0I/YirU63RdtYvWSNQx+Ia0dAeR1SNG5lgNBse2ZugXssOUKkp2iuEh6ohGluE25N0G0nOA1nfVT5qYSp09Q3ACuTe/2lr8Q/3EY2DGYsDc10J4Z1MzydpjYU4pZCdQJVgNtM1jJrWw2JAVWK1uWIf2lYGaylXYqZ828tCPwjhzivp+cQIq2OpUbuSe5R9qqeuPlwlI3hf3To6TptoIEBsEbruGByt5Cp2Qu6rQvPIikY
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=simple; d=taugh.com; h=date:message-id:from:to:cc:subject:in-reply-to:mime-version:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; s=1e70.53cd6f1e.k1407; olt=johnl@user.iecc.com; bh=T75CKfBv587oNajucqLSTxXR1QNWLPVUgzPQIO6pzwA=; b=ktb2bHBf/KF1r6irpocH5WbKSxLpBP/5OVDzylN+xcZYqI0rNhJUBdmZFnVdMGFD0lG4iYusYWMGVGeqdhW7UkJ19EHiHUBCoSxHA2afcwCkJPsLizz21ZNmBSPmcTuiLODbVeaXRwd/788PmeLh3kY4zCoIG7tp965AKlVPks/2Ov46cCGrsjlo5V5GzJDHYtvN5vSUUMX1Ie1TtE5tbwROa3NBZTlpc5zsoDAYlOFoo/WtgdctVnDoV6Y7ghi6
Date: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 19:50:32 -0000
Message-ID: <20140721195032.7791.qmail@joyce.lan>
From: John Levine <johnl@taugh.com>
To: apps-discuss@ietf.org
In-Reply-To: <64A70A8D-E82B-4269-B243-6A5DA98AEB56@standardstrack.com>
Organization:
X-Headerized: yes
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-transfer-encoding: 8bit
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/fd0uSc9JbPTRSZnBLrG322Gz-UM
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] Call for Adoption: draft-seantek-text-markdown-media-type
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
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: Mon, 21 Jul 2014 19:50:54 -0000

In article <64A70A8D-E82B-4269-B243-6A5DA98AEB56@standardstrack.com> you write:
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>-=-=-=-=-=-
>
>The biggest issue seems to be that there are a whole bunch of *almost*
>compatible markups.
>
>I would offer one of two directions. One is to punt and do what the draft
>says - acknowledge incompatible dialects and ignore compatibility. The other
>is to define an official Markdown markup, presumably based on the Gruber Web
>site.

Another approach is to do what RFC 4263 did for text/troff.  There's a
process= parameter which gives the recipient a hint about which
subflavor of troff it is.  Their example is:

  Content-Type: text/troff ; process="dformat | pic -n | troff -ms"

R's,
John

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email