W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > www-tag@w3.org > February 2011

Re: Feedback on Internet Media Types and the Web

From: Eric J. Bowman <eric@bisonsystems.net>
Date: Mon, 7 Feb 2011 22:00:14 -0700
To: Larry Masinter <masinter@adobe.com>
Cc: "www-tag@w3.org" <www-tag@w3.org>
Message-Id: <20110207220014.57ec1f15.eric@bisonsystems.net>
Larry Masinter wrote:
> I don't know what kind of" groundwork" you want laid or why it
> would make sense.

Defining what suffixes mean.  The current definition...

"More generally, '+suffix' constructs should be used with care, given
the possibility of conflicts with future suffix definitions."

...is not reflective of reality, *that's* what doesn't make sense.

> +xml got defined, for better or worse, without prior" groundwork".

As an experiment.  The experiment was a success.  The standard needs to
be updated to account for this success, so that the registry stays
current with modern expectations based on that success.  There was no
need to define +suffix before +xml came along, i.e. no need for prior
groundwork.  Now that +xml *has* defined +suffix, it's time to adopt
that definition in general, to lay the groundwork for insisting that
they be defined uniformly (as opposed to +suffix meaning whatever any
given media type says it means, in which case what's the point of the
syntax even existing).

> Defining policies in general doesn't seem hefpful.

Allowing suffixes without defining what they're meant for, isn't
helpful -- although the current wording was appropriate when it was
written, before +xml, times have changed.  The registry defines general
meanings for "image", "text", and "application", so I don't see why it
shouldn't also define +suffix.

> What do you think using+ son in a mime type SHOULD mean

Exactly what everyone else thinks it DOES mean -- folks tend to be
surprised to find out this isn't what it means, that it's actually

> and can you get anyone to agree with you?

Yes, Ned Freed, whose views I've been deferring to in this discussion,
as he does seem to be the person who knows more about this than anyone


But please don't make this about me, I don't have a horse in this race.
My interest is in improving the utility of the registry, by identifying
where it fails to meet community expectations.  I've identified a
problem and surfaced a solution.  I'm not part of the problem, and
haven't suggested the solution.  I've merely reported my findings as an
observer, and suggested a course of action.

Received on Tuesday, 8 February 2011 06:12:10 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 22:56:37 UTC