- From: Adam Barth <w3c@adambarth.com>
- Date: Tue, 26 Jan 2010 09:23:59 +0000
- To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
- Cc: "W3C/IETF" <w3c-policy@ietf.org>, Lisa Dusseault <lisa.dusseault@gmail.com>, www-archive <www-archive@w3.org>
Ok. I've subscribed to apps-discuss and the volume seems to be manageable. I suspect it will make the most sense to narrow the scope of sniffing as much as possible. My guess is that means to HTTP user agents that wish to volunteer. I don't think we want to infect email / news / instant messaging with this craziness (at least not on purpose). As for substantial editing, the draft already needs that. :) Adam On Tue, Jan 26, 2010 at 7:13 AM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: >> I'm not sure what the best venue for discussing the >> draft might be. I suspect that public-html, >> whatwg, or ietf-http-wg might have the most >> knowledgeable folks. > > The document as it stands on does not restrict > itself to sniffing only in the context of HTML, > or only for the applications within HTTP. Rather, > it is a general set of guidelines for content-type > heuristics. If you mean to have a narrower applicability > for this document, then it would need substantial > editing to make that clear, and would then also > need more analysis of the impact of having one > interpretation of MIME for HTTP when invoked from > HTML while another for every other context. > > I picked "apps-discuss" after a discussion > Lisa (apps area director). While it was previously > discussed on ietf-http-wg@w3.org, substantial > parts are out of scope for the current > HTTPBIS working group. > > One of the major concerns about "sniffing" > is whether the sniffing rules are compatible with > the behavior of other Internet applications that > use MIME, e.g., email, news, instant messaging. > > Since the document and concept has already had > substantial review within whatwg, ietf-http-wg, > public-html, and public-webapps, I think the > concern should turn to insuring review by the > rest of the affected protocol designers and > implementors. > > apps-discuss is archived: > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/apps-discuss > > Larry > -- > http://larry.masinter.net > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Adam Barth > Sent: Wednesday, January 20, 2010 6:15 PM > To: Larry Masinter > Cc: HTTP Working Group; public-html@w3.org; public-webapps@w3.org > Subject: Re: FYI: review of draft-abarth-mime-sniff-03 > > Thanks Larry. I'm not subscribed to apps-discuss, so I might not see > discussion that takes place there. I'm not sure what the best venue > for discussing the draft might be. I suspect that public-html, > whatwg, or ietf-http-wg might have the most knowledgeable folks. > > Adam > > > On Wed, Jan 20, 2010 at 3:27 PM, Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com> wrote: >> Since raised on W3C TAG >> http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-tag/2010Jan/0076.html: >> >> I reviewed draft-abarth-mime-sniff. I'm not sure I found all of the past >> discussion on the document, and I probably got some wrong, but it hasn't >> been updated in quite a while. >> >> I sent the review to apps-discuss (since it deals with non-HTTP sniffing as >> well): >> >> http://www.ietf.org/mail-archive/web/apps-discuss/current/msg01250.html >> >> (discussion on apps-discuss@ietf.org) >> >> Since there are several W3C documents advancing that make normative >> reference to this, getting timely review should be a priority. >> >> Larry >> -- >> http://larry.masinter.net >
Received on Tuesday, 26 January 2010 09:24:54 UTC