W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2006

Re: registering formats in the web [uriMediaType-9] [Fwd: Request for MIME media type Application/Personal Tree - prs.]

From: Paul Libbrecht <paul@activemath.org>
Date: Sun, 05 Feb 2006 22:51:32 +0100
Message-ID: <43E67364.9020701@activemath.org>
Cc: www-tag@w3.org

Mark Nottingham wrote:
> Personally, I'm not quite as eager to allow arbitrary formats be 
> registered as I used to be. The registry acts as a brake on 
> proliferation (as intended), and the issues around "what deserves its 
> own media type" are tricky enough that some sort of review process is 
> necessary.
> I should attribute at least some of the cause of this hesitation to 
> the Microformats folks, who encourage reuse of existing formats and 
> data models, rather than reinvention. I'm not completely convinced 
> that this is the right approach for everything (in particular, at the 
> element/statement level, depending on your data model of choice), but 
> at the granularity of identifying/dispatching formats, it might be.

I'd like to add my 2p on this issue.
I am currently working on copy and paste of mathematical formulae for 
the ActiveMath learning environment whose source formulae are encoded in 

As you probably know, the only way to negotiate inter-application 
copy-and-paste or drag-and-drop are mime-types... so I have to be sure 
that these are working for our purpose.

One requirement I have on these mime-types is the necessity to describe 
the set of mathematical symbols supported by the clients. One such set 
is the MathML-content specification set of symbols. But, typically, 
there are others:
- for example if you go to some mathematical systems which have 
traditionally different set of symbols (I think Maple needs some 
classical symbols to be non-MathML-symbols).
- for example if you go  to some places where  the input is highly 
limited hence even supporting the whole MathML-content is too much.

I even think these set of symbols should even be authorable.
Enabling this to be declared at the negotiation allows 
source-applications (or their authors) to respond to such limitations by 
providing the necessary translators, if possible. Right now, I also 
serve these clips by HTTP GETs and I dare say that a request for 
text/xml can only be honoured in a completely arbitrary fashion...

Are you saying that such set of symbols should not be declarable as easy 
as a web-publication ? I tend to believe that my requirements say the 

Received on Sunday, 5 February 2006 21:51:37 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 7 January 2015 15:32:48 UTC