Re: [apps-discuss] W3C TAG Comment on Draft Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures

> On 4/20/2012 6:30 AM, Jeni Tennison and others wrote:
>  > ...

> Thanks for all the comments.

> This is what I've come up with that seems to satisfy the concerns I've
> heard expressed so far:

> Media types using "+json" SHOULD process any fragment identifiers
> defined for "application/json" in the same way as defined for that media
> type. (At publication of this document, there is no fragment
> identification syntax defined for "application/json".) Specific media
> types using "+json" MAY identify additional fragment identifier
> considerations, MAY define processing for fragment identifiers that are
> classed as errors for "application/json" and MAY designate fragment
> identifiers defined for "application/json" that SHOULD NOT be used.

> Same text for +fastinfoset, +wbxml and +zip. The note I added for +xml
> is similar:

> Media types using "+xml" SHOULD process any fragment identifiers defined
> for "application/xml" in the same way as defined for that media type.
> (At publication of this document, the fragment identification syntax
> considerations for "application/xml" are defined in <xref
> target='RFC3023'/>.) Specific media types using "+xml" MAY identify
> additional fragment identifier considerations, MAY define processing for
> fragment identifiers that are classed as errors for "application/xml"
> and MAY designate fragment identifiers defined for "application/xml"
> that SHOULD NOT be used.

AFAICT this covers every point that has been raised.

				Ned

Received on Sunday, 22 April 2012 02:34:24 UTC