RE: Media types

Info

http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg07108.html

Might be wise to assume that stacked extensions will not get (easily) approved, hence microxml
might want to split from xml and create its own suffix.

My understanding is that what is achieved by suffixes could also be achieved with paramters,
so if inheritance from XML is desired it might be reasonable to go with registering a parameter for application/xml,
similar to how AtomPub extended Atom. (application/atom+xml -> application/atom+xml;type="feed" + application/atom+xml;type="entry"),
ie application/xml;type="micro"

Peter

________________________________
From: James Clark [mailto:jjc@jclark.com]
Sent: September 12, 2012 08:59
To: Rushforth, Peter
Cc: John Cowan; public-microxml@w3.org
Subject: Re: Media types

You can't nest subtypes: for example, application/xml/foo.  But application/foo+micro+xml is explicitly mentioned in the passage I quoted from RFC3023.

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 6:21 PM, Rushforth, Peter <Peter.Rushforth@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca<mailto:Peter.Rushforth@nrcan-rncan.gc.ca>> wrote:
Try as I might, I can't find the reference, but I'm pretty sure you can't stack
 suffixes.

I'll keep looking, but is anyone else aware of that rule?

Peter

> -----Original Message-----
> From: John Cowan [mailto:cowan@ccil.org<mailto:cowan@ccil.org>] On Behalf Of John Cowan
> Sent: September 10, 2012 23:43
> To: public-microxml@w3.org<mailto:public-microxml@w3.org>
> Subject: Re: Media types
>
> James Clark scripsit:
>
> > We should think about what our story is on media types?
> > application/xml, application/microxml,
> application/microxml+xml, application/micro+xml?
>
> I'd favor the last, as showing that MicroXML documents are
> XML.  Specific MicroXML-based formats could be
> */foo+micro+xml, extending the existing pattern.
>
> --
> John Cowan              cowan@ccil.org<mailto:cowan@ccil.org>
> http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
> Any day you [see] all five woodpeckers is a good day.
> --Elliotte Rusty Harold
>
>