IETF Logo Mail Archive

Re: [Json] Media types, extensibility in draft-ietf-json-i-json-02

"Markus Lanthaler" <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net> Mon, 07 July 2014 14:41 UTC

Return-Path: <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
X-Original-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Delivered-To: json@ietfa.amsl.com
Received: from localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AA2AC1A013B for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2014 07:41:00 -0700 (PDT)
X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com
X-Spam-Flag: NO
X-Spam-Score: -2.551
X-Spam-Level:
X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.551 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-1.9, FREEMAIL_FROM=0.001, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE=-0.0001, RP_MATCHES_RCVD=-0.651, SPF_PASS=-0.001] autolearn=ham
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 B_PZWd2-OZbr for <json@ietfa.amsl.com>; Mon, 7 Jul 2014 07:40:59 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mout.gmx.net (mout.gmx.net [212.227.17.20]) (using TLSv1.2 with cipher DHE-RSA-AES256-GCM-SHA384 (256/256 bits)) (No client certificate requested) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTPS id C655E1A011C for <json@ietf.org>; Mon, 7 Jul 2014 07:40:58 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from Vostro3500 ([77.119.131.246]) by mail.gmx.com (mrgmx102) with ESMTPSA (Nemesis) id 0LyS5K-1WZnfC1V26-015tyD; Mon, 07 Jul 2014 16:40:48 +0200
From: Markus Lanthaler <markus.lanthaler@gmx.net>
To: 'Tim Bray' <tbray@textuality.com>, 'Joe Hildebrand' <jhildebr@cisco.com>
References: <CALcoZionwZ1gn0hkhq4sKcDKg3LK13+d-XvBzXUA4iHjS6PHNA@mail.gmail.com> <CAMm+LwgU5veinaNJ6ptLJ509QD3R5=LEbpfmNjZSy5C+8jfPXg@mail.gmail.com> <CAHBU6iuc2j4a5VYnrboMEMnAPxhs5i+iZxfpbfnN1oa3740TfQ@mail.gmail.com> <CALcoZioTakxzkuvrt1EgNAKS==NNskWJ1TLUjxtZ1TBGPD+EXw@mail.gmail.com> <CFDCB00F.52A7B%jhildebr@cisco.com> <3b407fff0cc14d5ba291cea58bacac4f@BL2PR02MB307.namprd02.prod.outlook.com> <CFDE30C2.52BE7%jhildebr@cisco.com> <CAHBU6itrQTvccZqTXDBo4MaK9Txu7gGfGh8mfS4Rmv73DwSXfQ@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CAHBU6itrQTvccZqTXDBo4MaK9Txu7gGfGh8mfS4Rmv73DwSXfQ@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 16:40:45 +0200
Message-ID: <043801cf99f1$7165f8b0$5431ea10$@gmx.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 15.0
Thread-Index: AQK1vLPhXwGnaN3t5HsVsgHOd3w9pAIkr+2RAleRoPACU9Td8QF5qzZNAYPjlbIBFJLU2AGaPkitmWSEfNA=
Content-Language: de
X-Provags-ID: V03:K0:MbF/u9s1UnAov01gkC0yjJejYrkqI0wpzDkhPm13+dhvWCORChI UoDIZfrHEAA+9X23La5m5FfYyayXJUOIazZFn8BRpkf6dmoucc2GF/JebNSrCEVTt0BIvZ9 mOL6rbM2/7RQl/qbnbKMkeKFeMCaK0G5b5IcqOEmvNqdbAoQGhIyeBLshCP1A6CgM8DIjnP froUPTpvpNoQP0KsxCqSw==
Archived-At: http://mailarchive.ietf.org/arch/msg/json/a3T-vr4XvSrVIL-TaT0l_vHFlnw
Cc: json@ietf.org, 'Mark Baker' <distobj@acm.org>, 'Phillip Hallam-Baker' <ietf@hallambaker.com>, 'Larry Masinter' <masinter@adobe.com>
Subject: Re: [Json] Media types, extensibility in draft-ietf-json-i-json-02
X-BeenThere: json@ietf.org
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.15
Precedence: list
List-Id: "JavaScript Object Notation \(JSON\) WG mailing list" <json.ietf.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/options/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/json/>
List-Post: <mailto:json@ietf.org>
List-Help: <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/json>, <mailto:json-request@ietf.org?subject=subscribe>
X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 07 Jul 2014 14:41:00 -0000

On Sunday, July 06, 2014 7:13 AM, Tim Bray wrote:
> So, question: Is there anyone else who agrees with Mark's original
> argument that there ought to be a Media type for i-json. I wouldn't
> be wildly against it, but frankly can't see much of a practical upside.

I don't think it makes much sense to define a separate media type for i-json and even less a media type suffix. It *might*, however, make sense to mint a profile URI as defined by RFC6906 [1] for i-json and register it according RFC7284 [2].


Cheers,
Markus


For your convenience, the links to the two RFCs:

[1] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6906
[2] http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7284



--
Markus Lanthaler
@markuslanthaler

v2.37.1 | Report a Bug | By Email | System Status