Re: [arcmedia] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on charter-ietf-arcmedia-00-00: (with COMMENT)

Barry Leiba <> Wed, 14 January 2015 00:46 UTC

Return-Path: <>
Received: from localhost ( []) by (Postfix) with ESMTP id B992F1ACE20; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:47 -0800 (PST)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.278
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.278 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=no
Received: from ([]) by localhost ( []) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id m8iTkcd7VWzu; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: from ( [IPv6:2a00:1450:4010:c03::230]) (using TLSv1 with cipher ECDHE-RSA-RC4-SHA (128/128 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 25CD31ACE15; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:46 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with SMTP id gf13so5585873lab.7; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:44 -0800 (PST)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;; s=20120113; h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject :from:to:cc:content-type; bh=jhLyDP9aHedc5YL0vNkGZR05b/EDNCoiFOPg9X48Msk=; b=VV0fNcf17AuKA9mPZctmUrKnHeoCHEJ+rnHmTKYuoYgGP65qILNyty2TEzpiIn8jcO f6He6dML0uXmZoL9WCmDl7Y44zp9+anBy7qi2axolMUObRsoP+c+HWKeJEIP/BMXQ4fS Dq4uovdhB9+z8fAsPFwg3MBCTbcDz7On3h+9f8r2EkrKYXCnCnbACSj9mLWxeAbjrktc 3bNq0XIPs8ABn4zMkIm4Rp+VH1zsjF81WKtOy0nDFc8QLTEYUDOqinDM9CotqKw36aLI S1Egf8pC4Zi4ILJfI5gOvw77lIpjvuDzfW7KNtJP5RbxEsocfvziVNRrfRclUawubl9l 6ZBQ==
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Received: by with SMTP id l14mr1104943laa.1.1421196404436; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:44 -0800 (PST)
Received: by with HTTP; Tue, 13 Jan 2015 16:46:44 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <>
References: <>
Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2015 19:46:44 -0500
X-Google-Sender-Auth: MqoRyI7em4zxZMuAZa6OkFpI20E
Message-ID: <>
From: Barry Leiba <>
To: Spencer Dawkins <>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Archived-At: <>
Cc:, The IESG <>
Subject: Re: [arcmedia] Spencer Dawkins' No Objection on charter-ietf-arcmedia-00-00: (with COMMENT)
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "Discussion of creating a new top-level media type, \"archive\", for archive bundles." <>
List-Unsubscribe: <>, <>
List-Archive: <>
List-Post: <>
List-Help: <>
List-Subscribe: <>, <>
X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2015 00:46:47 -0000

> We create top-level media types only rarely, only with Standards Track
> RFCs,
> and only when one or more media types get special (or common, in the
> case
> of more than one) handling that does not fit under an existing top-level
> media type.  RFC6838 defines this process.
> << I found myself wondering if archive met these criteria. I guess it
> does, and I guess that the RFC6838 process will be used, but I'm just
> guessing both of those. If the charter said that more plainly, I'd wonder
> less. >>

Hm.  Of course, we wouldn't be doing this if we thought it didn't meet
those criteria.  But see below.

> In these two paragraphs:
> The working group will use draft-seantek-kerwin-arcmedia-type as its
> initial input.  It will specify rules for registering subtypes under
> that
> new top-level type, considering at a minimum the issue of type suffixes,
> fragment identifiers, and internationalization.  The W3C TAG work on
> packaging and archives, currently in progress, will also be considered.
> Either in that same document or in one of more follow-on documents, it
> will
> produce an initial set of registrations under the new top-level media
> type.
> << I'm guessing "that same document" is
> draft-seantek-kerwin-arcmedia-type, but "The W3C TAG work on packaging
> and archives" is the closest possibility. Maybe this could be clearer?

I've addressed both of the above comments with a change in the
paragraph that mentions the "seantek" draft.  See if you think it's
all clear now.