- From: Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gmx.net>
- Date: Tue, 26 Feb 2013 19:18:12 +0100
- To: Marcos Caceres <w3c@marcosc.com>
- Cc: Fabrice Desre <fabrice@mozilla.com>, "public-sysapps@w3.org" <public-sysapps@w3.org>
* Marcos Caceres wrote: >On Tuesday, 26 February 2013 at 18:02, Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >> * Marcos Caceres wrote: >> > Encoding considerations: >> > 8bit if UTF-8; binary if UTF-16 or UTF-32 >> >> This should defer to other specifications per RFC 6839, I believe. > >Is it ok if I just defer to the JSON spec? Would I just say "See RCFXXXX"? Something along the lines of "Same as for application/json" would work for me. >> > File extension(s): >> > .webapp >> >> That choice requires some justification. > >Um … FireFox OS did it? That does not mean it's a good choice. I would not expect a JSON file under that extension, more likely a ZIP file or some such. I recommend to write up some argument in support of using the extension before the proposal goes to ietf-types or other review stages. Or picking a better extension. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/
Received on Tuesday, 26 February 2013 18:18:43 UTC