Re: Pursuing question of mime types in W3C specifications and nextactions

On Sunday, July 7, 2002, 8:51:45 PM, ned wrote:





>> On Tue, Jul 02, 2002 at 03:39:50PM -0400, Ian B. Jacobs wrote:
>> > [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype

>> I've asked around about whether this document represents an agreement
>> between the relevant parties, but so far all I've heard second hand is
>> "I think so".

>> Can anybody confirm, for the public record, that this is the Way?

nfmc> It certainly is A Way. I'm not sure it rises to the level of The Way, but I see
nfmc> nothing procedurally wrong here.

>> (FWIW, I'm very happy with it - it's simpler than even I was hoping for)

It is fairly simple. I note that, although the discussion period and
possibly IETF last call happens in sync with teh W3C last call (which
is good) the actual registration still only happens "Once the W3C
specification has become a Recommendation".

Thus, the catch-22 or chicken-and-egg situation is still not resolved:

- mime type registration requires a stable document
- stable document requires meeting W3C implementation criteria such as
Candidate Recommendation
- getting implementation experience for CR requires using the mime
type

So, shouldn't section  3.2 be renumbered  2.3?

In other words, register it before using it, use it to gain
implementation experience, and update the registration to take into
account implementor feedback, if needed.

Since W3C considers a CR stable enough to ask non-bleeding-edge
implementors to go implement it, it should also be stable enough to do
the registration, too?

-- 
 Chris                            mailto:chris@w3.org

Received on Monday, 8 July 2002 08:13:20 UTC