IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-appswg-xdash-03

Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net> Sat, 10 March 2012 18:40 UTC

Return-Path: <dhc@dcrocker.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 D09BB21F84FE; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:40:15 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -6.606
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-6.606 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.007, BAYES_00=-2.599, 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 P+gk7DAd8EGZ; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:40:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from sbh17.songbird.com (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0C77121F84FA; Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:40:15 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [192.168.1.11] (adsl-67-127-58-62.dsl.pltn13.pacbell.net [67.127.58.62]) (authenticated bits=0) by sbh17.songbird.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id q2AIe7km011677 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=NO); Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:40:13 -0800
Message-ID: <4F5B9FF5.7040209@dcrocker.net>
Date: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:39:49 -0800
From: Dave Crocker <dhc@dcrocker.net>
Organization: Brandenburg InternetWorking
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:10.0.2) Gecko/20120216 Thunderbird/10.0.2
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: John C Klensin <klensin@jck.com>
References: <62FF481C5AD21C3F683CD2B9@PST.JCK.COM>
In-Reply-To: <62FF481C5AD21C3F683CD2B9@PST.JCK.COM>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1"; format="flowed"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Greylist: Sender succeeded SMTP AUTH, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (sbh17.songbird.com [72.52.113.17]); Sat, 10 Mar 2012 10:40:13 -0800 (PST)
Cc: draft-ietf-appsawg-xdash.all@tools.ietf.org, apps-discuss@ietf.org, The IESG <iesg@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] APPSDIR review of draft-ietf-appswg-xdash-03
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12
Precedence: list
Reply-To: dcrocker@bbiw.net
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: Sat, 10 Mar 2012 18:40:15 -0000

On 3/10/2012 10:35 AM, John C Klensin wrote:
> However, an
> interpretation of Dave's statement could extend to a
> prohibition, not only on faceted or hierarchical names but on
> the "+xml" arrangements and the like that we've used in media
> types.


Unless I've entirely misunderstood the use of that qualifier, it indicates an 
encoding framework for the labeled data, not it's 'status'.

As such it would seem irrelevant to the current topic.

d/
-- 

   Dave Crocker
   Brandenburg InternetWorking
   bbiw.net

v2.23.0 | Report a Bug | By Email