Re: [media-types] image/svg+xml+gzip

[S Moonesamy <[e-mail]>]

Hi Murray,
At 06:04 PM 03-04-2024, Murray S. Kucherawy wrote:
>It did, but an oversight means it didn't follow the BCP for how one 
>registers, and gets reviewed, a new media type.  I don't believe 
>IETF consensus exists to bypass the relevant BCP, and I'm quite sure 
>a processing error should not be able to bypass a BCP.

I would suggest following the registration policy for the media 
type.  The Document Shepherd did not list any concerns about media 
type.  The IESG and other reviewers went through the 
specification.  Publication was approved.

Ten months later, there is a discussion about the registration of one 
of the media types used in the Proposed Standard.

>Yes, that's an option.  I agree that we have discretion to 
>grandfather this in, but that would be under a set of rules not 
>currently defined and with uncertain forward-looking effects, both 
>of which MEDIAMAN was chartered to address.  I wanted to check with 
>the community before we make such a decision.

I am looking at the two (please see quoted paragraphs) topics 
separately.  The working group (which is not this mailing list) could 
make recommendations which, for example, prohibit a request such as 
the one under discussion.

Regards,
S. Moonesamy