RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.txt
Dan Kohn <dan@dankohn.com> Mon, 23 October 2000 16:03 UTC
Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id JAA15870 for ietf-xml-mime-bks; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:03:54 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from mgate-01.teledesic.com (mgate-01.teledesic.com [216.190.22.41]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id JAA15866 for <ietf-xml-mime@imc.org>; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:03:53 -0700 (PDT)
Received: by mgate-01.teledesic.com with Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21) id <4GTP29ZB>; Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:10:04 -0700
Message-ID: <25D0C66E6D25D311B2AC0008C7913EE00105A101@tdmail2.teledesic.com>
From: Dan Kohn <dan@dankohn.com>
To: Philipp Hoschka <ph@w3.org>
Cc: ietf-xml-mime@imc.org
Subject: RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.txt
Date: Mon, 23 Oct 2000 09:09:17 -0700
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2650.21)
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
X-MIME-Autoconverted: from quoted-printable to 8bit by ns.secondary.com id JAA15867
Sender: owner-ietf-xml-mime@mail.imc.org
Precedence: bulk
List-Archive: <http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/>
List-ID: <ietf-xml-mime.imc.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:ietf-xml-mime-request@imc.org?body=unsubscribe>
The basic processes of IETF standardization would not allow a non-backward-compatible change to RFC2376bis, so I think there is little risk and some potential gain in referencing 2376bis. The fact that it has been "in the making for some while now" is exactly why I would prefer for any insights it contains not to go to waste. It is your choice, however. As to approval (which should be announced soon), see the minutes available at: http://www.ietf.org/iesg/iesg.2K-10-05 > 2. The IESG approved publication of XML Media Types > <draft-murata-xml-09.txt> as a Proposed Standard. Steve to send > announcement. My understanding of the RFC Editor queue is that you could reference 2376bis in your I-D with a request for them to fill in the correct RFC number, and that this should not delay your draft (which I believe also needs to go through Last Call first). - dan -- Dan Kohn <mailto:dan@dankohn.com> <http://www.dankohn.com> <tel:+1-650-327-2600> -----Original Message----- From: Philipp Hoschka [mailto:ph@w3.org] Sent: Monday, 2000-10-23 08:53 To: Dan Kohn Cc: ietf-xml-mime@imc.org Subject: Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.txt Dan Kohn a écrit : > > I would strongly suggest an include by reference, as implementation > experience will likely cause further updates to 2376bis at some point. As > an example, you are actually quoting text from RFC 2376, not 2376bis Citing RFC2376 seems correct, given that RFC 2376 is a stable spec, wheras the current internet draft (which you refer to as 2376bis) is not, and has been in the making for quite a while now. Given what you write below, it looks like this has changed recently. Do you have a pointer to the decision record ? Do you know the RFC number ? Do you know when it will be published ? As I said, I am will consider removing the "reference by copy", once I found out if anybody actually requested reference by copy, and why. However, I disagree with your argument that an advantage of citing by reference is that it allows easier updates - the reference will be to a stable document, and if that document is replaced by a new document, that doesn't mean that the registration for application/smil changes as well. Propagating the changes would require an update of the application/smil document. ... > If people are not willing to look up a referenced RFC, than they probably > won't bother reading the MIME registration RFC in the first place. As I said, I think there is practical evidence to the contrary. > Also, as specified in Section 7.1 of <http://www.imc.org/draft-murata-xml>, > we would recommend referring to 2376bis for "specifying magic numbers, > fragment identifiers, base URIs, and use of the BOM". If you decide not to > do so (e.g., because of non-XPointer fragment semantics), The fragment semantics of application/smil are compatible with XPointer, as far as I can tell. >it would be worth > specifying that explicitly in your registration.
- Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… muraw3c
- RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… Dan Kohn
- Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… Philipp Hoschka
- RE: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… Dan Kohn
- Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… Philipp Hoschka
- Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… Philipp Hoschka
- Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-… muraw3c
- FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.t… Dan Kohn