W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-smil@w3.org > October to December 2005

Re: draft-hoschka-smil-media-type vs +xml

From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
Date: Mon, 12 Dec 2005 11:19:29 +0100
Message-ID: <741929376.20051212111929@w3.org>
To: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
Cc: ietf-types@alvestrand.no, www-smil@w3.org, ietf-xml-mime@imc.org, ph@w3.org

On Monday, December 12, 2005, 10:27:14 AM, Bjoern wrote:

BH> Hi,

BH>  
BH> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-12.txt
BH> is a bit old by now, but I don't think application/smil should be COMMON
BH> as it does not use the +xml convention for XML media types. Instead, it
BH> should be OBSOLETE and application/smil+xml, defined in the same draft,
BH> should be used instead.

BH> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/PR-SMIL2-20050927/ only has application/smil
BH> (which is not currently registered), it should use application/smil+xml
BH> and point out that application/smil is obsolete, assuming that the +xml
BH> version will be registered in the not too distant future.

Thanks for spotting this, Björn. I suspect it was copied over from SMIL
2.0 which predates the +xml convention. I agree that
application/smil+xml should be the preferred type and should be
registered.

SMIL editors, the procedure to follow is given at
http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html

(and is supposed to start at last call, by the way)


-- 
 Chris Lilley                    mailto:chris@w3.org
 Chair, W3C SVG Working Group
 W3C Graphics Activity Lead
 Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Monday, 12 December 2005 10:19:28 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Monday, 7 December 2009 10:53:28 GMT