W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > May 2010

Re: Status of draft-abarth-mime-sniff?

From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
Date: Mon, 17 May 2010 14:16:39 +1000
Cc: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>, public-ietf-w3c <public-ietf-w3c@w3.org>
Message-Id: <673214C8-18AA-487F-892C-9EB21CFC2437@mnot.net>
To: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>

On 17/05/2010, at 2:11 PM, Adam Barth wrote:

> On Sun, May 16, 2010 at 9:01 PM, Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch> wrote:
>> On Mon, 17 May 2010, Mark Nottingham wrote:
>>> What's the status of this draft? It doesn't nominate an Intended Status,
>>> nor is it being tracked by an Area Director, so its future in the IETF
>>> isn't defined. Do you still consider its venue the IETF?
>> 
>> So long as it is implemented interoperably, I don't really mind where it
>> is published, personally. I defer to Adam, who has done most of the work
>> on this draft so far (I just did the first bit, basically).
> 
> Philosophically, I think the IETF is the "right" venue for the
> document, but I understand that it's politically unpopular.

Do you mean by the IETF, browser vendors, W3C, someone else?


>  Browser vendors are converging on the algorithm in the draft, which is great.
> I think it makes sense to publish it in a permanent form so that folks
> years from now will know how this stuff works.  If you have advice for
> how to make it more palatable to the IETF, I'd welcome your input.

I think the best thing you could do would be to try to progress the draft and see what happens. Otherwise we're just speculating.

Cheers,


--
Mark Nottingham     http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Monday, 17 May 2010 04:17:36 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 17 May 2010 04:17:37 GMT