[media-types] new draft: "A Media Type Structured Syntax Suffix for JSON Text Sequences"

[Erik Wilde <[e-mail]>]

hello.

On 2016-09-19 11:17, Erik Wilde wrote:
> hello mark
>> On Sep 19, 2016, at 10:46, Mark Baker <[e-mail]> wrote:
>> Are you intending to register "+json-seq" as a new suffix? If not,
>> then that name falls afoul of the naming requirements;
> you're of course right, but shouldn't there be a suffix, even if the spec itself didn't define one? should we register the suffix in the geojson seq spec? if not, i'd be willing to whip up a very short draft just registering that suffix. any thoughts about these options?

given that JSON text sequences possibly will become the foundation for 
other media types (this thread was triggered by the discussion of the 
application/geo+json-seq draft), i have created a short draft for 
registering +json-seq as a structured syntax suffix for media types:

https://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-json-seq-suffix

(i just realized that i have used the wrong shortname and will fix this 
asap to say "draft-wilde-json-seq-suffix", but for now please have a 
look at the draft that is linked above.)

i hope there is nothing (too) controversial in there, and have mostly 
looked at RFC 6839 for inspiration, in particular for the issue of how 
to define the fragment identifier semantics.

any feedback is greatly appreciated! cheers,

dret.

-- 
erik wilde | mailto:[e-mail] |
            | http://dret.net/netdret    |
            | http://twitter.com/dret    |