Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.txt

muraw3c@attglobal.net Wed, 18 October 2000 13:32 UTC

Received: by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) id GAA09561 for ietf-xml-mime-bks; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 06:32:32 -0700 (PDT)
Received: from prserv.net (out4.prserv.net [32.97.166.34]) by ns.secondary.com (8.9.3/8.9.3) with ESMTP id GAA09557 for <ietf-xml-mime@imc.org>; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 06:32:31 -0700 (PDT)
From: muraw3c@attglobal.net
Received: from localhost ([210.88.161.151]) by prserv.net (out4) with SMTP id <20001018133737239018a03se>; Wed, 18 Oct 2000 13:37:38 +0000
To: dan@dankohn.com
Cc: ph@w3.org, ietf-xml-mime@imc.org
Subject: Re: FW: I-D ACTION:draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-05.txt
In-Reply-To: <25D0C66E6D25D311B2AC0008C7913EE001059F6B@tdmail2.teledesic.com>
References: <25D0C66E6D25D311B2AC0008C7913EE001059F6B@tdmail2.teledesic.com>
X-Mailer: Mew version 1.94.2 on Emacs 20.4 / Mule 4.1 (AOI)
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: Text/Plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-Id: <20001018223739T.muraw3c@attglobal.net>
Date: Wed, 18 Oct 2000 22:37:39 +0900
X-Dispatcher: imput version 20000228(IM140)
Lines: 43
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>

Dan and Philipp,

> Philipp, could I suggest that you review
> <http://www.imc.org/draft-murata-xml>, which is expected to shortly replace
> RFC 2376.  Specifically, I would strongly recommend changing your
> application to application/smil+xml, and quoting the appropriate sections of
> RFC 2376bis by reference rather than by repeating the text.
> 
> Thanks for considering this.
> 
> 		- dan

I raised this issue in January.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00315.html

Philipp replied. 
--http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00319.html

>However, the use of "application/smil" predates the proposal of 
>appending "-xml" to XML-based MIME types by more than a year - I think
>the first Internet draft dates from April '98. The proposal has
>already been succesfully reviewed in the past on ietf-types,
>but somebody dropped the ball bringing it to the IESG. Given
>this history, and that there is an installed base, it seems reasonable 
>to stick with the current practice of using "application/smil".

I requested addition of this historical reason in the I-D.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00320.html

>However, in order not to make an antecedent, I would like the I-D to mention 
>this name convention and reasons not to follow it.

Phillip oked.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00321.html

Phillip, could you revise the I-D as you promised?

Cheers,

IBM Tokyo Research Lab &
International University of Japan, Research Institute

MURATA Makoto