Re: [apps-discuss] +exi

Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net> Sun, 12 February 2012 19:59 UTC

Return-Path: <derhoermi@gmx.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 EF65621F8636 for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:59:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -3.017
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.017 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-2.277, BAYES_20=-0.74]
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 nGhBCbLyVNPg for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:59:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.22]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id 6666521F8617 for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 12 Feb 2012 11:59:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 12 Feb 2012 19:59:42 -0000
Received: from dslb-094-223-155-246.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.155.246] by mail.gmx.net (mp034) with SMTP; 12 Feb 2012 20:59:42 +0100
X-Authenticated: #723575
X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19e6RoHZXJepfHHgPkxc7vmLzVEjDIFjHlUmkXopf /t+7i/DSayJ0bk
From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
Date: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 20:59:45 +0100
Message-ID: <b96gj7pa05cim9fo6s4oe83dh8p88q7bc5@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de>
References: <CB59D465.18D85%psaintan@cisco.com> <86F0E68C-8D18-4F9A-86C5-0CC93D406238@sensinode.com> <4F357924.2070705@stpeter.im> <hnuaj7hjvc3l168s7j5h634530ecfq1j41@hive.bjoern.hoehrmann.de> <01OBTT8X03QS00ZUIL@mauve.mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01OBTT8X03QS00ZUIL@mauve.mrochek.com>
X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0
Cc: paduffy@cisco.com, Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>, Thomas Herbst <therbst@silverspringnet.com>, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] +exi
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: Sun, 12 Feb 2012 19:59:48 -0000

* Ned Freed wrote:
>> Last I heard the idea was that draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs would
>> formalize the `+example` convention, but someone would have to write the
>> registration for `+json` separately. That has not happened yet as far as
>> I am aware. I argued that draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs should re-
>> gister already established conventions like `+json`, but apparently I
>> was unsuccessful.
>
>Read the draft again, in particular the IANA considerations. That's exactly
>what it does do.

I take it you mean

   o  The initial content of the registry shall be constructed at the
      time of the registry's creation by the designated media types
      reviewer(s) by examining the current media types registry and
      extracting all conforming uses of "+suffix" names.

I would have expected the draft to have the actual registration forms
for the suffixes in question, but okay.
-- 
Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de
Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de
25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/