Re: registering formats in the web [uriMediaType-9] [Fwd: Request for MIME media type Application/Personal Tree - prs.]

On Fri, 2006-02-03 at 08:53 +1100, Mark Baker wrote:
> Thanks for the clarifications, but ...
> On 2/3/06, Dan Connolly <> wrote:
> > Well, there need only be one registered media type that works this
> > way.
> How can that be?  The TAG has already said[1] that new formats should
> get new media types, right?

True; meanwhile, issue uriMediaType-9 is still open...

>   How would this media type change that?

The idea is to migrate from a central registry of media types
to just using the web as a registry.

So new formats would continue to get all the documentation
that media types have always gotten, but they wouldn't need
to get registered by anybody in particular, so long as they
got a nice persistent URI with available representations.

> Are you perhaps thinking that the URI in the parameter could be used
> to dispatch applications?


>   If so, I don't think that's workable as
> virtually all (AFAICT) software that dispatches off media types, does
> it off the media type name independent of the value of any parameters.

In such a dispatch slot, we insert a handler for t9 that dispatches

Eventually, the dispatch API should evolve to just use URIs.
Or... that's the idea, anyway.

>  [1] (admittedly, this was
> superceded by a finding[2] which doesn't say that, exactly)
>  [2]
> Mark.
Dan Connolly, W3C
D3C2 887B 0F92 6005 C541  0875 0F91 96DE 6E52 C29E

Received on Thursday, 2 February 2006 22:29:46 UTC