W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-media-fragment@w3.org > May 2011

Re: Concerns about backwards compatibility of media fragments

From: Boris Zbarsky <bzbarsky@MIT.EDU>
Date: Fri, 06 May 2011 15:23:11 -0400
Message-ID: <4DC44A9F.6060405@mit.edu>
To: "Hausenblas, Michael" <michael.hausenblas@deri.org>
CC: public-media-fragment@w3.org
On 5/6/11 3:22 PM, Hausenblas, Michael wrote:
>> Ah.  They're not in the registration document, but that's presumably just because the template in RFC 4288 doesn't ask for that information.
> It's a SHOULD (cf sec. 4.11 of RFC 4288), but let's not do spec lawyering ;)

I'm not spec lawyering.  I would expect that anyone registering a type 
takes the provided template and just fills it in; reading anything into 
omission of data in the registration that this template doesn't ask for 
is not reasonably.

> I do not disagree and I don't see a problem. If you read my review on the Wiki page carefully, I back then suggested to proactively approach people to sort out things. Now as the SVG case is known to the WG it should be treated respectively.

OK.  How is it planned to be treated, then?

Received on Friday, 6 May 2011 19:23:43 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:52:46 UTC