W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > September 2003

Re: suggestion re: media type registration

From: Simon St.Laurent <simonstl@simonstl.com>
Date: Sun, 14 Sep 2003 11:00:41 -0400
To: public-ietf-w3c@w3.org
Message-ID: <r02000000-1026-357BB184E6C411D7870D0003937A08C2@[192.168.124.11]>

murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp (MURATA Makoto) writes:
>On Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:56:45 -0700 "Roy T. Fielding"
><fielding@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> As for the +xml types, a more effective mechanism would have been to
>> define a major type of xml under the namespace control of W3C, or
>> barring that an xml tree (application/xml.soap) which could either
>> be assigned to the W3C or at least incorporate the W3C process. That
>> would, of course, require an RFC to set up.  The +xml suffix seems
>> to beg for the most delays.
>
>Non-W3C organizations (e.g., OASIS and ISO/IEC) create XML-based
>languages and they may want to register specialized media types. Thus,
>I think the registration process should not be controlled by W3C.  

I'm not sure what Roy means by "namespace control of W3C" here, and
would appreciate clarification.

He may be suggesting that no MIME content types beyond application/xml
are needed for XML documents, as XML processors can use namespace
information to differentiate which application should get which chunk
of XML information, and additional information in the MIME content type
would be superfluous.

While I disagree with this view in the current circumstances, it is
certainly coherent - but under no one's control in particular.  I'm not
sure what the W3C would want to add to the current namespace process,
but suspect that "control" would go over badly with the many
organizations beyond the W3C which are in the business of creating XML
vocabularies for public use.

As for this:
>> barring that an xml tree (application/xml.soap) which could either
>> be assigned to the W3C or at least incorporate the W3C process.

It is my understanding that the W3C itself is unwilling to manage
directly any kind of kind of registration system, and that URIs are
supposed to resolve these kinds of problems without the need for
centralized control.

>>The convention application/vnd.w3c.*+xml makes much more sense
>>to me.

To me as well.
Received on Sunday, 14 September 2003 11:00:46 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Tuesday, 8 January 2008 14:12:55 GMT