Re: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)

On Nov 17, 2011, at 6:06 , TianLinyi wrote:

> Hi, All
> 
> Since there is no clear advantage for both ways, is there any guidance on how to make a decision? I think we don't need to spend too much time on this. Maybe it is the time to make a choice now based on rough consensus, right? Or if there is an alternative way to get guidance from somewhere in IETF first regarding how to create a top level registry?

I think that it's way overdue for us to work out whether everything [not [image | video | audio]] should be application, and if not, why not.

> 
> Cheers,
> Linyi
> 
> ________________________________________
> 发件人: apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org [apps-discuss-bounces@ietf.org] 代表 t.petch [ietfc@btconnect.com]
> 发送时间: 2011年11月17日 19:55
> 到: Levantovsky, Vladimir
> Cc: Chris Lilley; David Singer; apps-discuss@ietf.org; gadams@xfsi.com
> 主题: Re: [apps-discuss] font/* (and draft-freed-media-type-regs)
> 
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Levantovsky, Vladimir" <Vladimir.Levantovsky@MonotypeImaging.com>
> To: "Peter Saint-Andre" <stpeter@stpeter.im>
> Cc: "Chris Lilley" <chris@w3.org>; "Ned Freed" <ned.freed@mrochek.com>; "David
> Singer" <singer@apple.com>; <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; <gadams@xfsi.com>
> Sent: Wednesday, November 16, 2011 9:01 PM
>> Adding Chris Lilley from W3C
>> 
>> On Tuesday, November 15, 2011 9:17 PM Peter Saint-Andre wrote:
>>> 
>>> On 11/16/11 7:22 AM, Levantovsky, Vladimir wrote:
>>> 
>>>> However, the sentiments expressed at the time were very similar to
>>>> this discussion; I was told that applying for a new top-level type
>>>> was "A BIG NO-NO", that prior attempts to register font/* failed, and
>>>> that unless I am willing to dedicate significant part of my life to
>>>> this activity (i.e. applying and lobbying for a new top-level "font"
>>>> type) the effort would most likely get us nowhere.
>>> 
>>> Perhaps I am mistaken, but I read the discussion differently: I see an
>>> openness to registering font/* now.
>>> 
>>> My personal opinion is that registering font/* type still makes a lot of
> sense and this is something we need to do, even if it involves re-registering
> some of the existing subtypes under the new font/* tree. I brought this up for
> discussion at today's conference call with W3C WebFonts WG, and the general
> opinion was that having font/* type registered would still be a good thing for
> the industry.
>> 
> Vlad
> 
> Just to be clear, what meaning does WebFonts attach to 'font', were it an object
> class, how would it be characterised?  This thread has shown a number of
> different meanings of the term and I am not familiar with the work of W3C.
> 
> Tom Petch
> 
>> Thank you,
>> Vlad
>> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> apps-discuss mailing list
> apps-discuss@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss

David Singer
Multimedia and Software Standards, Apple Inc.