On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 10:19 PM, Julian Reschke <julian.reschke@gmx.de>wrote: > It is not in the registry because no proper definition has been supplied > (AFAIK). > > And I'm pretty certain that the designated experts are aware of it in being > in use, and that they will reject any attempt to register it for something > else. If the designated experts are aware of types in use that should not be registered by others, that knowledge should be published so everyone can be aware of it. Perhaps they could maintain some sort of online list of types in use... > We can certainly try to assign blame, and figure out if it's the fault >> of the people who didn't register the mimetype when they started to >> use it, or if they attempted to register but ignored the correct >> advice from the people running the registry telling them not to use it >> since it's in violation of rfc 3023, or if it's the people running the >> registry for making registration such a complicated procedure as to >> deter people from using it. >> >> However this doesn't change the fact that the registry has not worked. >> > > Whether it has "worked" or not depends on how you define "working" in the > context of a registry. > In that case, we (browser implementors, Web authors, and would-be creators of MIME types) need a registry that has a different definition of "working" than that used by IANA. Rob -- "Now the Bereans were of more noble character than the Thessalonians, for they received the message with great eagerness and examined the Scriptures every day to see if what Paul said was true." [Acts 17:11]
Received on Monday, 6 September 2010 10:31:43 UTC