Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/senml+json

[Ned Freed <[e-mail]>]

> On Sep 22, 2010, at 12:20 PM, Ned Freed wrote:

> >
> >> Le 22 sept. 2010 à 04:34, Peter Saint-Andre a écrit :
> >
> >>>> What I think is needed here is a revision/update to RFC 4288 to establish a
> >>>> registry of allowed +suffix constructs as well as expanded guidelines for their
> >>>> use.
> >>>
> >>> That sounds like an excellent idea.
> >
> >> Could that include usage of multiple plus for hierarchical typing?
> >
> > Anything is possible, but given past resistance to hierarchical structure in
> > media types, I think it's a little unlikely we'll get consensus on such a
> > mechanism.
> >
> > My personal take is that it's a bad idea, because I think it will encourage
> > people to regard these as properties that can be attached to anything or
> > placed in any order, which isn't how things work.

> It's been so long that I've forgotten - what was the reason to not define new
> top-level types for things like XML and JSON?

Mostly because the structuring syntax is completely orthogonal to what
top-level media types tell you. It's entirely reasonable to have image, video,
or model types that use XML or JSON. Subtypes of message that use XML or JSON
aren't out of the question either.

				Ned