Re: [Cellar] Conversation about a NON-IANA request in Matroska

Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca> Tue, 24 August 2021 21:02 UTC

Return-Path: <mcr@sandelman.ca>
X-Original-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: cellar@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6C60A3A12FB for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 14:02:14 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -1.899
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.899 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, SPF_HELO_NONE=0.001, SPF_PASS=-0.001, URIBL_BLOCKED=0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Received: from mail.ietf.org ([4.31.198.44]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id B5SmI_zM8Csg for <cellar@ietfa.amsl.com>; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 14:02:08 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca (tuna.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:3:216:3eff:fe7c:d1f3]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher ADH-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id 558C53A12F7 for <cellar@ietf.org>; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 14:02:07 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id E314738A2E; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 17:07:33 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from tuna.sandelman.ca ([127.0.0.1]) by localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with LMTP id E5XgcbOaGAZ0; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 17:07:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from sandelman.ca (obiwan.sandelman.ca [IPv6:2607:f0b0:f:2::247]) by tuna.sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 48C2738A28; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 17:07:28 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from localhost (localhost [IPv6:::1]) by sandelman.ca (Postfix) with ESMTP id 47CD516E; Tue, 24 Aug 2021 17:01:58 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Richardson <mcr@sandelman.ca>
To: Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org>, "Murray S. Kucherawy" <superuser@gmail.com>, Spencer Dawkins at IETF <spencerdawkins.ietf@gmail.com>, Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar@ietf.org>, Francesca Palombini <francesca.palombini@ericsson.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAOXsMF+j8T+H1HZoJKsRsyb_VehNn0y1981WGcX+G0EHGHq1TQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CAKKJt-ceukRCPUK=DTvDxDBPw-ddROX-snfZQ-BatSkgVZ0-qw@mail.gmail.com> <CAL0qLwY6V8eVG56ckhy3GFDwW61-6OD9_h=X-vDWFySM0e3B9A@mail.gmail.com> <4945.1629386506@localhost> <CAL0qLwZeE1qZ+5wLnCMFoCcvP2cf5=9Y+g5Lx3k5iqxF7gAw5g@mail.gmail.com> <22109.1629403274@localhost> <CAL0qLwbUk7QLiCEESqbEknUELSgure+MrdvLXBK+hkRV_GxVxQ@mail.gmail.com> <31989.1629428105@localhost> <CAOXsMF+j8T+H1HZoJKsRsyb_VehNn0y1981WGcX+G0EHGHq1TQ@mail.gmail.com>
X-Mailer: MH-E 8.6+git; nmh 1.7+dev; GNU Emacs 26.1
X-Face: $\n1pF)h^`}$H>Hk{L"x@)JS7<%Az}5RyS@k9X%29-lHB$Ti.V>2bi.~ehC0; <'$9xN5Ub# z!G,p`nR&p7Fz@^UXIn156S8.~^@MJ*mMsD7=QFeq%AL4m<nPbLgmtKK-5dC@#:k
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/signed; boundary="=-=-="; micalg=pgp-sha512; protocol="application/pgp-signature"
Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 17:01:58 -0400
Message-ID: <14770.1629838918@localhost>
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/cellar/NcjCA006wI-MJ_P341Pz59FAdbk>
Subject: Re: [Cellar] Conversation about a NON-IANA request in Matroska
X-BeenThere: cellar@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.29
Precedence: list
List-Id: Codec Encoding for LossLess Archiving and Realtime transmission <cellar.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/cellar/>
List-Post: <mailto:cellar@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/cellar>, <mailto:cellar-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 24 Aug 2021 21:02:15 -0000

Steve Lhomme <slhomme@matroska.org> wrote:
    > Given one of the goal on this Matroska specification is long time
    > preservation, that would seem odd to design something that renders
    > older systems incompatible with the current/new specifications. If any
    > of the MIME types we have in attachments were to become invalid all of
    > a sudden we wouldn't like it.

That's not what I suggested.

I suggested that every reader would always accept both values.

But that, at some date in the future, writers would start using the new
values.  I suggested that the date be decided now in order to:
  a) establish a deadline for readers to get updated.
  b) allow writing software to gracefully transition without having to be updated.
  (of course, such software could also have an option)

We assume that the files are forever, but that the software that reads them
will get updated now and then.

In reality, the mime type doesn't really go anywhere specific unless the file
is being transfered over email or http.  On MAC, with HFS, the MIME type
might lookup a resource type which gets associated with the file.

But I suspect that one can associate two things with one resource, and I also
suspect (having really never coded for MacOS) that it doesn't take mime types
as input anyway.

--
]               Never tell me the odds!                 | ipv6 mesh networks [
]   Michael Richardson, Sandelman Software Works        |    IoT architect   [
]     mcr@sandelman.ca  http://www.sandelman.ca/        |   ruby on rails    [