[apps-discuss] text/yaml Re: [media-types] OpenApi media type registration questions

Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com> Thu, 10 March 2016 01:29 UTC

Return-Path: <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
X-Original-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost []) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6358A12D6B0; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:29:59 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.602
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.602 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, RCVD_IN_MSPIKE_H2=-0.001, SPF_HELO_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id jGvVWRFCYER5; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:29:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from mxout-08.mxes.net (mxout-08.mxes.net []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 481AF12D6AA; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:29:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: from [] (unknown []) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES128-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by smtp.mxes.net (Postfix) with ESMTPSA id E30D9509B8; Wed, 9 Mar 2016 20:29:55 -0500 (EST)
To: Darrel Miller <darrel@tavis.ca>, media-types@ietf.org
References: <SNT405-EAS138D1B69D14EDBB70D8B858A3B20@phx.gbl> <56DE624C.6020700@seantek.com> <SNT405-EAS2340EEA914B00AA87537FD8A3B40@phx.gbl> <56E0C35B.9@seantek.com> <SNT405-EAS34588208A678723B2EDD9FA3B40@phx.gbl>
From: Sean Leonard <dev+ietf@seantek.com>
Message-ID: <56E0CDBA.3050301@seantek.com>
Date: Wed, 9 Mar 2016 17:28:26 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:38.0) Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/38.6.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <SNT405-EAS34588208A678723B2EDD9FA3B40@phx.gbl>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Archived-At: <http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/apps-discuss/uZ-aJkyLy_RAHGOCIsWzJmWrkSg>
Cc: dispatch@ietf.org, "apps-discuss@ietf.org" <apps-discuss@ietf.org>
Subject: [apps-discuss] text/yaml Re: [media-types] OpenApi media type registration questions
X-BeenThere: apps-discuss@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.17
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: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/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: Thu, 10 Mar 2016 01:29:59 -0000

[adding apps-discuss and dispatch]

On 3/9/2016 5:20 PM, Darrel Miller wrote:
> Sean,
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: media-types [mailto:media-types-bounces@ietf.org] On Behalf Of
>> Sean Leonard
>> RFC 6838 Section 6
>> https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838#section-6
>> RFC 6839 has examples of the template actually instantiated in the text.
> Thanks. So this is where I find myself in a catch-22 situation.  In order to
> register the +yaml suffix, it needs to there a reference to a specification
> for YAML.  However, there is no such specification that is managed by a SDO.
> I searched in the YAML Core mailing list and back in 2003 they discussed
> their plan to use text/yaml as the media type.  There has been no further
> discussion of registering a media type since then on the list.
> So it seems that, without a spec under an SDO, it would not be possible to
> register text/yaml or register the suffix.
> It seems that the only option available would be for someone to convince the
> YAML team to allow a variant of their spec (it has images in it) to be
> created as an IETF spec.
> Does that reasoning appear sound?

Not exactly.

First of all, it's the same situation as Markdown (see the text/markdown 
discussion over time on the apps-discuss mailing list).

The most important hurdle has been passed: some people actually *want* 

The second hurdle has also (likely) been passed: people are actually 
using text/yaml for YAML stuff. This turns out to be more useful than 
the registration itself. Deploy first, register later. ;-)

The next hurdle is overcoming developer laziness, since it requires some 
modicum of effort to do the registration. Sounds like we have a willing 
victim...er...volunteer. ;-)

Getting text/yaml just requires an Informational independent-stream or 
IETF stream RFC. First write an Internet-Draft. The Internet-Draft can 
reference the yaml.org specification, without changing control over the 
specification to the IETF. Then submit the draft to the dispatch mailing 
list. (Maybe also a couple of other mailing lists, for places in IETF 
that use YAML.)

Depending on the outcome of the discussion, either the IETF will take it 
up, or not. If they do, then the media type registration will be 
published with IETF Consensus (see text/markdown). If not, then it can 
still be published an the independent stream by submitting it to the 
Independent Submissions Editor (see image/bmp, aka 

I have not tried to register a structured syntax suffix before. 
Superficially, the process appears to be simpler, as it only needs 
Expert Review. For that, just follow what RFC 6838 Section 6 says.

Best of luck!