Re: [art] [media-types] [[e-mail]] New Version Notification for draft-shelby-exi-registration-02.txt

[Olaf Bergmann <[e-mail]>]

Ned Freed <[e-mail]> writes:

>> Well, processing a document is one thing. But signaling that you can
>> process a document (with or without schema) is another thing. The "+exi"
>> suffix helps where application/exi and content-coding: exi are not
>> applicable (e.g. in a CoAP Accept option). This is pretty much what the
>> draft describes.
>
> Hmm. Well, if this assessment of the mechanism in CoAP is valid - and I take no
> position on that - it sounds to me like CoAP effectively extended the semantics
> of media types in a fairly fundamental way.

I do not think it does, more likely was my description not
accurate. What CoAP does is that it assigns a numeric value to a
registered media type/content coding combination which then is used when
negotiating the acceptable content type between sender and receiver.

> In particular, it seems like you're using them as a signalling mechanism where
> no data of the given type is actually involved. If that's indeed the case, then
> that extension to the use of media types needs to be fully and completely
> described, along with its security considerations, so that types intended
> for this usage can undergo proper review before they are registered.

The number is just an abbreviation of what would otherwise go into the
Content-Type or Accept header together with Content-Coding. I do not see
why this would be an extension to common handling of media types and
their encodings?


Grüße
Olaf