- From: Jonathan Marsh <jmarsh@microsoft.com>
- Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2005 14:22:18 -0800
- To: "Hugo Haas" <hugo@w3.org>
- Cc: <public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org>
Thanks for your comment. The WS Description Working Group tracked this as a Last Call comment LC304 [1]. We accepted the proposal at http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-ws-desc/2005Oct/0063.html to address this problem. As we plan to go to CR shortly, if we don't hear from you within 10 days, we will assume this satisfies your concern. [1] http://www.w3.org/2002/ws/desc/5/lc-issues/issues.html#LC304 -----Original Message----- From: public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org [mailto:public-ws-desc-comments-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of Hugo Haas Sent: Thursday, August 18, 2005 10:12 AM To: public-ws-desc-comments@w3.org Subject: Definition of a IANA media type token Part 2 uses the concept of "IANA media type token"[1], but does not define by value nor reference what it is exactly: a media type? a media type with some parameters? As far as I can tell, or more precisely as far as Google can tell, we are the only ones using this denomination. We should clarify this concept. I believe that what we mean is: The 'type "/" subtype' production as defined in section 5.1. Syntax of the Content-Type Header Field of RFC 2045 Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies. Reading this section, the media type is not necessarily registered with IANA, so I would suggest changing the name to "media type token". Note that this proposal deliberately leaves out the possibility of using parameters, which I think is fine and is what we were after. Cheers, Hugo 1. http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/WD-wsdl20-adjuncts-20050803/#http-operation-de cl-relate -- Hugo Haas - W3C mailto:hugo@w3.org - http://www.w3.org/People/Hugo/
Received on Monday, 14 November 2005 22:32:27 UTC