Re: [dispatch] WGLC: draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-02.txt

Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net> Thu, 19 July 2018 13:21 UTC

Return-Path: <mnot@mnot.net>
X-Original-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: dispatch@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 63FF7129619; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:47 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.701
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.701 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, DKIM_SIGNED=0.1, DKIM_VALID=-0.1, DKIM_VALID_AU=-0.1, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-0.7, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham autolearn_force=no
Authentication-Results: ietfa.amsl.com (amavisd-new); dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=mnot.net header.b=pdHkvGKp; dkim=pass (2048-bit key) header.d=messagingengine.com header.b=HRRXXPhm
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 3nFceGzSslNR; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:45 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from out1-smtp.messagingengine.com (out1-smtp.messagingengine.com [66.111.4.25]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher AECDH-AES256-SHA (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id CBB2E130DDB; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 06:21:44 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from compute3.internal (compute3.nyi.internal [10.202.2.43]) by mailout.nyi.internal (Postfix) with ESMTP id 310A621BCA; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:21:44 -0400 (EDT)
Received: from mailfrontend2 ([10.202.2.163]) by compute3.internal (MEProxy); Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:21:44 -0400
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=mnot.net; h=cc :content-transfer-encoding:content-type:date:from:in-reply-to :message-id:mime-version:references:subject:to:x-me-sender :x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=Hurt23YyZY9uy0jLgWoA1AXiJHUT7 MLiNPSAugKTgOg=; b=pdHkvGKpirILwSDaqJXeeh+q0flkitVhZ+cH7LjXWuCBQ CnUHfPDsOo4y7lqlChCMpyFM1XEawwxMlzkeuWSVTuUpUMKXeP5/GKEJubucn+rU 40+Et/UyKnHBZ2+SRd8/vBKmmYcp9UYjNLLcVRnPALFTG9XXZ9VCESqOWVkYN4El JmmjodQeH9PoUh9pnbrlOwG5HbZ3Sc4mUGLLFjjTHnp+pEbfmO1LcxJLiPle4YNd oBc2qn52nsHb3Mm7UhLYOBh57NeAWbp55Vrbssg4JuQRnXw70A6xiT7L8xPTOEUZ Yk5ysrLfjduTb2d6UBsRIqnIrdgAqbLmlB6db9QtA==
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d= messagingengine.com; h=cc:content-transfer-encoding:content-type :date:from:in-reply-to:message-id:mime-version:references :subject:to:x-me-sender:x-me-sender:x-sasl-enc; s=fm3; bh=Hurt23 YyZY9uy0jLgWoA1AXiJHUT7MLiNPSAugKTgOg=; b=HRRXXPhmm1Wct6lKxcbOme mwwPgp3/hKuQGagWV26F1hFXw9gz2wG2hcJ9CbTiqeCyWM++pgF1Vnw1j5s/KbzM 2Wwt4oJ0ThD2eNXVJkmf7yCmQVyizDsKHIifF25h1dl3Kf4iU9qG5J5/fn1uM8/O 2g/UtGAgLrtr4ibqS2qIhSnDLv/1djVi1oBmO7aRmkwi/okNZIobrHqhOXo5MVel 6nv2axVtIHm+vJ0t85EssQTecHsPpGOBGtsLhUuJb46lA3L+4B+kxXbWzh6urNAX sugzt0SQdPhkd91AalIQDo6dX9L05Id0U3NBuCGmIR1Kamukwvel3y+1orpYfdoA ==
X-ME-Proxy: <xmx:Z5BQW0sJa4_NuvuwJDFhQ798K_ezUry1F0O9SHcmSDw9xRq_41uumQ> <xmx:Z5BQW8JjqhaQ2JpjSp8tVycl0-u5-_neBzix3pxQWOayGWJZqic2mQ> <xmx:Z5BQW8MmhVxeAhbkrkHbxKCRDFcsV1bAo0HtX5lZU3IMlJx1BMNtYw> <xmx:Z5BQW9OFGYUksBdNtikj6zUiae_z__bSok9Ej300BEYn9GucWhwzfA> <xmx:Z5BQWwFGtTJ66HnvDMPVf9--eQnhnP7Sz0Y0qCNe2dze-_wUEZPkmQ> <xmx:aJBQW2ZWVdG-BNyGV-_JvdfYl9oNXYqDMnYqg1bpfwwPiTXRlYTAyw>
X-ME-Sender: <xms:Z5BQW7E1KQTh6EGuAvNYPcAalf6murjT_AxfMjeR7XRBqbKIWtsBLQ>
Received: from dhcp-873a.meeting.ietf.org (dhcp-873a.meeting.ietf.org [31.133.135.58]) by mail.messagingengine.com (Postfix) with ESMTPA id 58FD310268; Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:21:43 -0400 (EDT)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 11.5 \(3445.9.1\))
From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
In-Reply-To: <CANnEKUZA7YWVhDGV7t5LescEivOoNWq3sbasXuJtd9orwHrj=g@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 09:21:42 -0400
Cc: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>, DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>, draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <DC9E582B-2539-4678-AE47-3FF005D024EA@mnot.net>
References: <CAHBDyN5kB=yi_eFty2hRO4LpadKrSSY0KY-BAS2447Y84pPoWg@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnXEbYtc7VKisvyTEAiTbteQPT=gXF9HY=VgeSrSCo7FCg@mail.gmail.com> <CANnEKUaUuRQ5NrLafcg_BtVKTdf+NNgDUEfn0h2oWh4R1F6+xw@mail.gmail.com> <CANnEKUbBY4XsFsR_-zP1v_PJnav6mhtFUBC5YOGt1OrzNNSzew@mail.gmail.com> <CABkgnnWnhoW8Om9DKgiTXMcC466d9y_4zDy0newrb5LFWqO47Q@mail.gmail.com> <000001d41dd8$a2ad12e0$e80738a0$@acm.org> <CANnEKUZCyb29-_e-6FKrqM0vbJyiZkOSuFj_0GZAq5ve4H=wFg@mail.gmail.com> <00a501d41f17$63233e70$2969bb50$@acm.org> <CANnEKUZA7YWVhDGV7t5LescEivOoNWq3sbasXuJtd9orwHrj=g@mail.gmail.com>
To: Bradley Meck <bradley.meck@gmail.com>
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.3445.9.1)
Archived-At: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/dispatch/YdpmEnF9qm70ypGxWDCd_VMN2Ng>
Subject: Re: [dispatch] WGLC: draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-02.txt
X-BeenThere: dispatch@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.27
Precedence: list
List-Id: DISPATCH Working Group Mail List <dispatch.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <https://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/browse/dispatch/>
List-Post: <mailto:dispatch@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch>, <mailto:dispatch-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Thu, 19 Jul 2018 13:21:48 -0000

+1. There's confusion about their status; the registry is the right place to set the record straight.



> On 19 Jul 2018, at 9:02 am, Bradley Meck <bradley.meck@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> I think reflecting reality is important, is the only concern the number of types / review time? Should that be split into a separate RFC to add all the obsolete types so that it can take more time to land all of those. Regardless of intent, there MIMEs are in use and part of the web standards used by browsers. Having them documented/registered seems important if the MIME registry is intended to reflect actual usage.
> 
> On Wed, Jul 18, 2018 at 11:17 PM Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> wrote:
> I was hoping to avoid stuffing the MIME registry with (and making everyone review) lots of useless obsolete templates; the use of OBSOLETE in “Intended use” should only be for previously registered types. Not new (dubious) registrations.
> 
>  
> 
> Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2018 7:25 AM
> To: LMM@acm.org
> Cc: DISPATCH <dispatch@ietf.org>; draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: [dispatch] Fwd: WGLC: draft-ietf-dispatch-javascript-mjs-02.txt
> 
>  
> 
> Per https://github.com/bmeck/I-D/issues/2
> 
>  
> 
> The extra registrations are to match up with the Web specification on accepted MIME types for historical reasons https://mimesniff.spec.whatwg.org/#javascript-mime-type
> 
>  
> 
> On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:15 AM Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org> wrote:
> 
> ➢ Only `text/javascript` is not obsolete per https://html.spec.whatwg.org/multipage/scripting.html#scriptingLanguages 
> 
> I wonder about the utility of newly registering (or updating the registration) of types that are obsolete.
> If there’s significant deployment of names that new implementations need to be aware of, then ‘obsolete’ isn’t the right status; if not, then who would use the new, but obsolete, definition?
> 
> Larry
> http://LarryMasinter.net
> 
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> dispatch mailing list
> dispatch@ietf.org
> https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/dispatch

--
Mark Nottingham   https://www.mnot.net/