W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2011

Re: ACTION-472: New Mime-web-info draft

From: Bob Ferris <zazi@elbklang.net>
Date: Tue, 01 Feb 2011 01:56:18 +0100
Message-ID: <4D475A32.9000000@elbklang.net>
To: www-tag@w3.org
Am 01.02.2011 01:38, schrieb Eric J. Bowman:
> Bob Ferris wrote:
>>
>> schrieb Eric J. Bowman:
>>> Nathan wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Ideally they wouldn't, they'd use "text/html" as normal, and to
>>>> find the related RFC/spec (rather than googling) they'd simply
>>>> lookup http://media-type-registry.w3.org/text/html which would
>>>> redirect through to the relevant specification.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Which relevant specification?  What would the URI equivalent of
>>> text/html "point to"?
>>
>> Something like http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2854.txt ?
>>
>
> You can't assume a 1:1 mapping, which brings us back to, what media
> type does the following URI indicate?
>
> http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt

This document defines media types not a single media type. That means, I 
need URI to address each concrete complete media type e.g., 
http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.html#sec-8.18 for 
"application/rdf+xml". Whether other specifications are included 
(imported) in this concrete media type specification is another issue 
e.g., I guess "application/rdf+xml" requires also the media type 
specification for the "XML media type".
A redirection for "*+xml" media types to 
http://www.apps.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.html is not sufficient, because it 
usually wouldn't completely describe the concrete media type. I think a 
direct mapping is necessary. When two media types use the same URI then 
they are equal e.g., AFAIK the media type for Turtle isn't a standard 
one and e.g. "application/rdf+turtle" and "text/turtle" exist in the wild.

Cheers,


Bob
Received on Tuesday, 1 February 2011 00:56:47 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Thursday, 26 April 2012 12:48:30 GMT