- From: MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
- Date: Thu, 30 Oct 2003 01:24:57 +0900
- To: www-tag@w3.org
- Cc: Murata <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
Here is a rough sketch. Having presented this sketch, I ask the TAG to reconsider its decision to publish an I-D that updates RFC 3023. It would be nice if somebody from W3C (probably some member of I18N WG or XML Core WG?) can help me. I think that further discussion about the content of this I-D should be moved to the IETF-XML-MIME ML. By the way, I cannot find image/svg+xml in the IANA list and cannot find an I-D. I find an I-D for application/rdf+xml, but no RFC yet. 1) deprecate text/xml, text/xml-external-parsed-entity, and text/*+xml - the MIME canonical form with short lines delimited by CR-LF, making UTF-16 and UTF-32 impossible - Casual users will be embarrassed if XML is displayed as text, while experts can certainly save and then browse XML documents. - Worries that the absence of the charset parameter of text/xml and text/*+xml is particularly harmful, since the default of that parameter is US-ASCII 2) the optional charset parameter is RECOMMENDED if and only if the value is guaranteed to be correct - Server implementers or Server Managers SHOULD NOT specify the default value of the charset parameter of text/xml, application/xml, Text/xml-external-parsed-entity, Application/xml-external-parsed-entity, */*+xml, or Application/xml-dtd, unless they can guarantee that that default value is correct for all MIME entities of these media types. 3) Fragment identifier At present, RFC 3023 says: As of today, no established specifications define identifiers for XML media types. However, a working draft published by W3C, namely "XML Pointer Language (XPointer)", attempts to define fragment identifiers for text/xml and application/xml. The current specification for XPointer is available at http://www.w3.org/TR/xptr. We have XPointer recommendations but are not ready to bless XPointer. We should say so. 4) Possible reasons for not providing the charset parameter for specialized media types I think that "This media type is utf-8 only and thus does not need any mechanism to identify the charset" is a perfectly good reason, since "UTF-8 only" is a generic principle. This should be mentioned in the I-D. 5) Needs a real example for the +xml convention. Application/soap+xml should be mentioned in Section 8 (Examples). 6) Update References Reference to three XPointer recommendations without blessing them as fragment identifiers of XML media types. Reference to MathML Version 2 rather than MathML Version 1.1 Reference to Scalable Vector Graphics (SVG) 1.1 Although XML 1.1 is not a recommendation yet, I think that we should mention it and say "It is very likely that XML 1.1 will reference to this document". 7) New Appendix: Changes from RFC 3023 We need a summary of these changes -- MURATA Makoto <murata@hokkaido.email.ne.jp>
Received on Wednesday, 29 October 2003 11:28:00 UTC