Re: [media-types] Mime type for patch files?

[Henrik Andersson <[e-mail]>]

Eric Prud'hommeaux skrev:
> I think this negotiation must happen with the tool maintainers which
> currently recognize text/x-{patch,diff}. Given that that's probably
> impossible, the answer is almost certainly that you are stuck with
> "x-". Thanks for picking this up.
>
> I tried to answer your question but ended up puzzled by this text in
> [RFC6838]:
> [[
>    Note that types with names beginning with "x-" are no longer
>    considered to be members of this tree (see [RFC6648]).  Also note
>    that if a generally useful and widely deployed type incorrectly ends
>    up with an "x-" name prefix, it MAY be registered using its current
>    name in an alternative tree by following the procedure defined in
>    Appendix A.
> ]]
>
> The only "x-" subtree in [IMT] is "x-www-form-urlencoded", and maybe
> it's an exception. The tricky question is whether x-{diff,patch}
> deserve the same exception. On one hand, we don't want a slippery
> slope of exceptions, on the other hand, the tree's job is to document
> current or achievable reality.
>
>
> [RFC6838] https://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838#section-3.4
> [IMT] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml#application
>
In short, don't use the "x-" prefix. And don't use the "x." prefix
either. Those explicitly mean "not registered". The mentioned exception
is a sad reality that only came to pass because of the insane costs to
change it. There are no such costs here.