W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-ietf-w3c@w3.org > March 2010

Re: Requesting IESG Approval for the Media Type application/exi

From: Carine Bournez <carine@w3.org>
Date: Wed, 31 Mar 2010 12:57:34 -0400
To: Alexey Melnikov <alexey.melnikov@isode.com>
Cc: Philippe Le Hegaret <plh@w3.org>, iesg@ietf.org, public-ietf-w3c@w3.org, Dan Connolly <connolly@w3.org>, Carine Bournez <cbournez@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20100331165734.GC13350@jay.w3.org>
On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 06:14:47PM +0000, Alexey Melnikov wrote:
> Dear Philippe (and W3C),
> IESG has no problems registering this MIME type.
> However IESG would like to ask one (non blocking) question, which might  
> result in update to the registration:
> Many EXI documents can not be understood without the associated grammar  
> which does not have to be provided inside the EXI doc. It might be good  
> to define an optional parameter that provides a URI or some sort of name  
> to find the associated grammar.
> Please let IESG know if you would like to update the registration, or if  
> you want to register it as is.

Dear Alexey,

First, note that EXI processors do not exchange EXI grammars directly. The       
information used by the processors to build the grammars, in addition to         
the rules defined in the EXI format specification, is extracted from the         
document schema (if any) that the SchemaID option can specify.                   
The Working Group discussed the possibility of sending information about         
the document schema (i.e. schemaID) as an optional parameter of the              
application/exi Media Type.                                                      
We decided that it was not desirable:                                            
We already have the possibility to send the EXI Options in the EXI               
stream, otherwise Options are negotiated out of band. Having an optional         
parameter of the media type would introduce a third way to define the            
schemaID, outside of the EXI Options, which seems to be an unnecessary           
complication. In addition, the application/exi Media type is not the             
preferred way to describe the exchange, as stated in the specification,          
and as much as possible the Content Encoding token "exi" should be used          
along with the original XML document media type.

Thank you.

Carine Bournez -+- W3C Europe
Received on Wednesday, 31 March 2010 16:57:38 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:09:55 UTC