- From: Roy T. Fielding <fielding@apache.org>
- Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2003 13:56:45 -0700
- To: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Cc: public-ietf-w3c@w3.org
> Has the W3C considered a policy of registering media types in the vnd. > tree? E.g., > application/vnd.w3c.soap+xml > > It seems to me that this may help avoid some of the delays and > overhead with registration in the IETF tree*, and would encourage use > of the vnd. and prs. trees by example, so that people wouldn't be > prejudiced against them. I personally hate the vnd and prs trees -- it promulgates the same failed design as the x- prefixes. A reversed dns prefix would at least have made some sense. As for the +xml types, a more effective mechanism would have been to define a major type of xml under the namespace control of W3C, or barring that an xml tree (application/xml.soap) which could either be assigned to the W3C or at least incorporate the W3C process. That would, of course, require an RFC to set up. The +xml suffix seems to beg for the most delays. > * Although since my last post, I've had a report that vnd registration > with IANA is also quite slow and unpredictable... I haven't heard anything like that -- the Apache mime.types file is growing at an alarming rate, mostly due to vnd types. ....Roy
Received on Friday, 12 September 2003 16:57:28 UTC