- From: Mark Nottingham <mnot@mnot.net>
- Date: Tue, 6 Apr 2010 11:17:22 +1000
- To: Larry Masinter <LMM@acm.org>
- Cc: "'Dan Brickley'" <danbri@danbri.org>, "'Sebastien Lambla'" <seb@serialseb.com>, <www-tag@w3.org>
Adding to the confusion, the BNF in BCP13 is:
type-name = reg-name
subtype-name = reg-name
At any rate, it's important to remember that HTTP is a MIME-like protocol; i.e., informed but not necessarily restricted by MIME.
HTTPbis lists the differences in <http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-ietf-httpbis-p3-payload-09#appendix-A>. One way to resolve some of these issues is to add text that outlines how HTTP selectively leverages the media type registry.
Cheers,
On 05/04/2010, at 4:09 AM, Larry Masinter wrote:
> The main problem I've seen is when people are not careful to
> distinguish the "internet media type" from the "content-type
> string", because the latter can contain parameters
>
> text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1 vs. text/plain;charset=windows-1252,
> for example, which share a "Internet Media Type" but are
> different content-type strings.
>
> So
>
> draft-abarth-mime-sniff talks about MIME type sniffing, but the
> charset sniffing is in a different document. I think the general
> topic of "sniffing" (i.e., examining content using heuristics
> to determine the likely actual type, whether or not there is
> a content-type label supplied) might be approached more holistically
> if the terminology were clearer.
>
> I'm not sure if there are other terminology confusions
> that are as serious.
>
> MIME was the protocol design which defined Internet Media Type
> registry, subsequently adopted by HTTP (between HTTP 0.9
> and HTTP 1.0), so it's understandable how "MIME type" and
> "Internet Media Type" are sometimes used interchangeably.
>
>
> Larry
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dan Brickley [mailto:danbri@danbri.org]
> Sent: Sunday, April 04, 2010 9:15 AM
> To: Sebastien Lambla
> Cc: Larry Masinter; www-tag@w3.org
> Subject: Re: The use of MIME on the web: issues, toward a revised
> "finding" or joint W3C/IETF document
>
> On Sun, Apr 4, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Sebastien Lambla <seb@serialseb.com>
> wrote:
>> As both a web framework author and trainer, I find that there is
> lots of confusion introduced when various names are introduced for
> various areas, such as the Internet Media Type being referred to as
> MIME, as in "MIME sniffing" or "The use of MIME", as opposed to the
> historical MIME type.
>>
>> For me, tomatoes and tomatoes, but for the people that I introduce
> to those standards, I feel that those things are a barrier to wider
> communication.
>
> Yes, this is a good point. I've been involved in standards plenty but
> have only a pretty vague instinct for how I'm supposed to refer to
> this stuff. Generally I tend to *say* "MIME-type", but have this loose
> guilty sense that the real label is "Media type", but that as a phrase
> seems somehow less specific whereas "MIME-type" has the feel of a
> precise technical term. In either case I mean "those things like
> 'text/html' and 'application/rdf+xml'". It would be great to have a
> terminology summary / bluffer's guide.
>
> cheers,
>
> Dan
>
>
--
Mark Nottingham http://www.mnot.net/
Received on Tuesday, 6 April 2010 01:17:55 UTC