Re: [media-types] WG: Still need an editor....

["Martin J. Dürst" <[e-mail]>]

Hello Harald, others,

On 2022-02-15 18:17, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> Martin, I would be happy with having a draft that says what you say 
> below ("New top level types are rare enough and different enough that 
> each application needs to be evaluated separately").
> 
> The draft probably needs to say that the document specifying the new top 
> level type has to be a standards-track RFC approved by the IESG, I think 
> that's no change from previous practice.
> 
> If there are other considerations that we agree upon after discussion, 
> we can add them. But a draft shouldn't need to be much more than one 
> page of real content (+ the usual 4 pages of boilerplate).
> 
> Would you be willing to author such a draft?

If the draft is really going to be that short, I guess I'd be willing. 
I'll give it a try at the start of March, please ping me if you don't 
see anything from me by that time.

Regards,   Martin.

P.S.: Everybody, please be aware that Harald is very good a twisting 
arms :-).

> Harald
> 
> On 2/15/22 01:21, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
>> [see below]
>>
>> On 2022-02-15 08:40, Yeshwant Muthusamy wrote:
>>> Folks,
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Since Harald's last message calling for volunteer editors for the 
>>> "process for creating a new top level type", the silence has been 
>>> quite deafening. Is it a lack of interest or bandwidth or both?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> A review of the mediaman charter 
>>> (https://datatracker.ietf.org/wg/mediaman/about/) reveals a 
>>> dependency relationship between the first two items on the charter, 
>>> but it is not to the point where Item #2 is killed off if no progress 
>>> is made on Item #1 (at least that's the way I understand it from the 
>>> wording):
>>>
>>>    1.  Determine whether any specific criteria or guidance are 
>>> warranted to handle registration of future top-level media types, and 
>>> publish any such guidance.
>>>    2.  Develop and process the pending 'haptics' top-level media type 
>>> request, based on draft-muthusamy-dispatch-haptics, and the outcome 
>>> of the previous work item.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Are members OK with proceeding with Item #2 and punting on Item #1 
>>> until a later point in time? After all, 'font' went through the 
>>> process just fine (and was approved as an RFC) without Item #1.
>>
>> I for one would be happy with this. I think the main guidance I have 
>> so far distilled from the haptics draft is "don't go out and assume 
>> new top level types will be approved just because you start using 
>> them". But sadly, writing that up probably won't help.
>>
>> Other than that, I agree that registrations for top-level types are so 
>> sparse (and should continue to be sparse) and each one comes with its 
>> own considerations that it's difficult to write up something that's 
>> general enough to hold up for the next instance (if an when that would 
>> happen).
>>
>> Regards,   Martin.
>>
>>
>>> Since I have a vested interest in moving Item #2 forward, I am more 
>>> than happy to serve as editor for Item #1, with the proviso that IETF 
>>> members more well-versed in top-level media type registrations are 
>>> willing to contribute to the draft and help me along.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any takers?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>>
>>> Yeshwant
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Yeshwant Muthusamy, Ph.D. | Vice President, Standards
>>>
>>> [e-mail] | [phone]
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> www.immersion.com
>>>
>>> 330 Townsend St, Suite 234
>>>
>>> San Francisco, California 94107
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: media-types <[e-mail]> On Behalf Of Harald 
>>> Alvestrand
>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 1, 2021 4:32 PM
>>> To: [e-mail]
>>> Subject: [media-types] WG: Still need an editor....
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> At the moment, the -haptics draft has been republished as 
>>> draft-ietf-mediaman-haptics-00.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> We're still waiting for the -suffixes draft to be republished under 
>>> the new name.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> But more importantly, we're still hoping for someone to volunteer as 
>>> editor for the "process for creating a new top level type".
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Any takers?
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Harald
>>>