Re: [apps-discuss] font/*

Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com> Tue, 08 November 2011 14:15 UTC

Return-Path: <eburger@standardstrack.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 232ED21F8B0C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:15:38 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -102.653
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.653 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.054, BAYES_00=-2.599, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100]
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 e7a-EWIt0diZ for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:15:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from biz104.inmotionhosting.com (biz104.inmotionhosting.com [173.247.254.120]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6D0CB21F8B0B for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Tue, 8 Nov 2011 06:15:37 -0800 (PST)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; q=dns; c=nofws; s=default; d=standardstrack.com; h=Received:From:Mime-Version:Content-Type:Subject:Date:In-Reply-To:To:References:Message-Id:X-Mailer:X-Source:X-Source-Args:X-Source-Dir; b=Atpds0AOqM/Y1IKwBj1VCePc3SOrJab8KMfIYGQP45b9myZPmu3avCvLGjKzsZdxnSW3Mf8FgHN/PiIO42HWC3tQ57ImUTDklDyH321F52SyMpsAO1C2cZ4uZh+CLzQE;
Received: from ip68-100-199-8.dc.dc.cox.net ([68.100.199.8]:50437 helo=[192.168.15.184]) by biz104.inmotionhosting.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from <eburger@standardstrack.com>) id 1RNmSe-0005ml-1D for apps-discuss@ietf.org; Tue, 08 Nov 2011 06:15:36 -0800
From: Eric Burger <eburger@standardstrack.com>
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084)
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary=Apple-Mail-26-1004633302; protocol="application/pkcs7-signature"; micalg=sha1
Date: Tue, 8 Nov 2011 09:15:33 -0500
In-Reply-To: <4EB8E7FA.5030406@ninebynine.org>
To: "apps-discuss@ietf.org Discuss" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
References: <4EB86078.8070904@stpeter.im> <4EB8E7FA.5030406@ninebynine.org>
Message-Id: <B39EF37D-0BC6-4831-A66A-6B4A58C96B9C@standardstrack.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084)
X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report
X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - biz104.inmotionhosting.com
X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - ietf.org
X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12]
X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - standardstrack.com
X-Source:
X-Source-Args:
X-Source-Dir:
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 14:15:38 -0000

Agreed.

On Nov 8, 2011, at 3:27 AM, Graham Klyne wrote:

> 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
>> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss