"text/x-markdown" indicates that the content-type is experimental. Since our goal is to eventually formalize markdown as a standard, it doesn't make sense for our endorsed content-type (if any) to be experimental. However, RFC4288 says that content-types in the standards tree "MUST correspond to a formal publication by a recognized standards body", so until the markdown standard is much more mature we can't expect a text/markdown (or similar) content-type to be accepted by the IESG. I think the standard should address issues such as expected metadata (which is what the content-type and filename extension convey), because standardizing metadata allows for easier tooling. Ryan On Tue, Nov 20, 2012 at 1:15 PM, Pablo Olmos de Aguilera C. < pablo@glatelier.org> wrote: > On 20 November 2012 05:36, Mathias Bynens <mathias@qiwi.be> wrote: > > Relevant: > http://www.mail-archive.com/markdown-discuss@six.pairlist.net/msg00970.html > > Some systems uses text/x-markdown. Though seeing so many > implementations it's going to be hard to choose one. The link Mathias > posted it's a good resource and some guy there also pointed to the > correct RFC for media type specifications. > > Imho we have to work, gain the confidence of the community and -most > important- implementers/developers and discuss it (hopefully) with > them. > > Regards! > -- > Pablo Olmos de Aguilera Corradini - @PaBLoX > http://www.glatelier.org/ > http://about.me/pablox/ > http://www.linkedin.com/in/pablooda/ > Linux User: #456971 - http://counter.li.org/ > >
Received on Wednesday, 21 November 2012 13:09:30 UTC