Re: [apps-discuss] W3C TAG Comment on Draft Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures

David Booth <david@dbooth.org> Sun, 22 April 2012 15:20 UTC

Return-Path: <david@dbooth.org>
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 9CF7A21F852C for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:20:54 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.11
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.11 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1]
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 JGvtSoGt1Mop for <apps-discuss@ietfa.amsl.com>; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:20:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from relay01.pair.com (relay01.pair.com [209.68.5.15]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with SMTP id AFE8B21F84EF for <apps-discuss@ietf.org>; Sun, 22 Apr 2012 08:20:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: (qmail 34623 invoked from network); 22 Apr 2012 15:20:15 -0000
Received: from 174.58.10.129 (HELO ?192.168.10.140?) (174.58.10.129) by relay01.pair.com with SMTP; 22 Apr 2012 15:20:15 -0000
X-pair-Authenticated: 174.58.10.129
From: David Booth <david@dbooth.org>
To: Ned Freed <ned.freed@mrochek.com>
In-Reply-To: <01OELBIO0RA600ZGHB@mauve.mrochek.com>
References: <4F877CEE.5030107@arcanedomain.com> <01OE8S1I9Z2K00ZUIL@mauve.mrochek.com> <9452079D1A51524AA5749AD23E0039280EF063@exch-mbx901.corp.cloudmark.com> <CA8E55D5-822A-47DC-B5CB-583CC328227B@jenitennison.com> <4F87EBD4.90501@gmx.de> <CFA00AEC-F80B-4517-8101-A5DDA57555ED@jenitennison.com> <01OEABGEZ8RU00ZUIL@mauve.mrochek.com> <098D7D86-2FF3-4287-800F-5FAB6C0212F2@jenitennison.com> <01OEE9DUSD8400ZUIL@mauve.mrochek.com> <4F8D189A.3010304@gmx.de> <4F901485.20800@maillennium.att.com> <01OEITCHB07U00ZGHB@mauve.mrochek.com> <02811F06-0325-4A0D-AE0D-3B5AF07EAE97@jenitennison.com> <4F91A089.6070308@maillennium.att.com> <01OELBIO0RA600ZGHB@mauve.mrochek.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Date: Sun, 22 Apr 2012 11:20:51 -0400
Message-ID: <1335108051.2164.43102.camel@dbooth-laptop>
Mime-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Evolution 2.28.3
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 23 Apr 2012 08:26:01 -0700
Cc: apps-discuss@ietf.org, Tony Hansen <tony@maillennium.att.com>, "www-tag@w3.org List" <www-tag@w3.org>
Subject: Re: [apps-discuss] W3C TAG Comment on Draft Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures
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, 22 Apr 2012 15:20:54 -0000

> > Media types using "+json" SHOULD process any fragment identifiers
> > defined for "application/json" in the same way as defined for that media
> > type. 

Please forgive me if I am missing something obvious, but . . .

I find the sentence above ambiguous, as it isn't clear whether the
phrase 'that media type' refers to 'application/json' or 'Media types
using "+json"'.  I suggest being explicit instead of saying "that media
type".

> > Media types using "+xml" SHOULD process any fragment identifiers defined
> > for "application/xml" in the same way as defined for that media type.

Ditto.


-- 
David Booth, Ph.D.
http://dbooth.org/

Opinions expressed herein are those of the author and do not necessarily
reflect those of his employer.