Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2954821F8ACA for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:08:09 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -4.218 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-4.218 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=1.312, BAYES_00=-2.599, DATE_IN_PAST_06_12=1.069, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id QzqDf3WLnVBi for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora2.lax.icann.org (pechora2.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2d0:1::37]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 6B16721F8745 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:08:08 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk (fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.175]) by pechora2.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7U89EwN031899 for ; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:09:35 -0700 Received: from relay1.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.165]) by fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyIyf-0006IS-1p for ietf-types@iana.org; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:43:21 +0100 Received: from smtp0.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.205]) by relay1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1QyIwt-00068e-51; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:41:31 +0100 Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=Eskarina.local) by smtp0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QyIwt-0004tL-0Z; Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:41:31 +0100 Message-ID: <4E5BF684.7030502@ninebynine.org> Date: Mon, 29 Aug 2011 21:28:52 +0100 From: Graham Klyne User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Baker References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> <4E54C6D4.5030605@ninebynine.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Oxford-Username: zool0635 X-Greylist: Delayed for 00:25:50 by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora2.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.37]); Tue, 30 Aug 2011 01:09:35 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2011 08:08:09 -0000 On 28/08/2011 21:47, Mark Baker wrote: > On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >>>>>> 1. What is the point? Why not just use existing MIME type >>>>>> application/json? >>>>>> What, if anything, is the difference? >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a >>>>> multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to >>>>> contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be >>>>> able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an >>>>> embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other >>>>> random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse >>>>> the JSON first to make that determination. >>>> >>>> That makes more sense to me. It might be worth drawing that out a bit. >>> >>> I wouldn't think that necessary. New data formats should define their >>> own media type so that messages remain self-descriptive. >> >> Mark, >> >> I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with here. Maybe I was being too >> terse? I was just suggesting that the registration document include >> something akin to the above paragraph to make the purpose and intended use >> of the new content type clearer. > > Graham, yes, I understood that as your point. I was trying to > communicate that I don't consider it necessary or desirable for a > registration for a +foo type to mention why */foo isn't sufficient, > since IMO, the +foo type is always preferred. Ah, I think I understand. In terms of the actual specification, I don't disagree. My comment was made in the context of having relevant information to review the proposal. #g -- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C0EE721F8634 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:46:14 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -105.547 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-105.547 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-4.429, BAYES_20=-0.74, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id xOG4jUYD5pVS for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:46:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora5.dc.icann.org (pechora5.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 09E8B21F8620 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:46:06 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-wy0-f169.google.com (mail-wy0-f169.google.com [74.125.82.169]) by pechora5.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7SKl6gk011883 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:47:28 -0700 Received: by wyi11 with SMTP id 11so3702128wyi.28 for ; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:47:06 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.227.195.8 with SMTP id ea8mr3170313wbb.91.1314564425939; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:47:05 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mark@coactus.com Received: by 10.227.129.6 with HTTP; Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:47:05 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E54C6D4.5030605@ninebynine.org> References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> <4E54C6D4.5030605@ninebynine.org> Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 16:47:05 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: tpEcINjnOO6l9jHjdyNnMipNHhQ Message-ID: From: Mark Baker To: Graham Klyne Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora5.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.71]); Sun, 28 Aug 2011 13:47:29 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sun, 28 Aug 2011 20:46:14 -0000 On Wed, Aug 24, 2011 at 5:39 AM, Graham Klyne wro= te: >>>>> 1. What is the point? =A0Why not just use existing MIME type >>>>> application/json? >>>>> What, if anything, is the difference? >>>>> >>>> >>>> The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a >>>> multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to >>>> contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be >>>> able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an >>>> embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other >>>> random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse >>>> the JSON first to make that determination. >>> >>> That makes more sense to me. =A0It might be worth drawing that out a bi= t. >> >> I wouldn't think that necessary. New data formats should define their >> own media type so that messages remain self-descriptive. > > Mark, > > I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with here. =A0Maybe I was being too > terse? =A0I was just suggesting that the registration document include > something akin to the above paragraph to make the purpose and intended us= e > of the new content type clearer. Graham, yes, I understood that as your point. I was trying to communicate that I don't consider it necessary or desirable for a registration for a +foo type to mention why */foo isn't sufficient, since IMO, the +foo type is always preferred. Mark. Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 52C6921F8841 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:11:55 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.999 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.999 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 6xeg45Efyllj for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora3.lax.icann.org (pechora3.icann.org [208.77.188.38]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 70BDB21F883A for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:11:53 -0700 (PDT) Received: from moutng.kundenserver.de (moutng.kundenserver.de [212.227.126.171]) by pechora3.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7OBCQ4R000902 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:12:48 -0700 Received: from [192.168.178.27] (p5DDECB3C.dip0.t-ipconnect.de [93.222.203.60]) by mrelayeu.kundenserver.de (node=mreu0) with ESMTP (Nemesis) id 0MNQ45-1QuEVL1lYf-006rrD; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:12:22 +0200 Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1084) Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1 From: Paul Libbrecht In-Reply-To: Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 13:12:21 +0200 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Message-Id: References: To: James Snell X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1084) X-Provags-ID: V02:K0:IRRN7sVHfDN8+AC/hWgkHUT8dV63dLvGMZq+ExrXgnG DkAkGI3a8NLX1wIHf0uTf/vJU+H8br8enYDhaGsuZrGP2du8P/ x+foYKmm4v+Gpv+m6xpQ/SHbq7Sx5LmJRwvenb7Q47r9LVEFMQ Y5qlSOE7a8OpVVw/+juAMQgFS0OE2LKR4EPE2rRk0S6u0daIGW XPYcOmf3erQXESVB/6hmdeOQKpYst4goC1t+ZFtsTU= X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora3.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.38]); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 04:12:48 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:11:58 -0000 Dare I ask a curiosity question: what kind of interoperability can be = expected by such a declaration?? - how would an email or www client display this if at all?? - how would a desktop open such a document?? I guess, my concern is the same for the plain application/xml and = application/json... on all platforms I have seen this offered, one sees = developer services (or ridiculous bindings such as opening a web-browser = for a .xml file). I do not think this is the aim of this declaration, = or? Maybe identifying the function such a component would have within = OpenSocial would explain this to me. Naming two products that are libraries or standards to create other apps = makes this declaration quite fuzzy to me.=20 My eyes currently only see "that's a binary type, can't do anything with = it". paul Le 20 ao=FBt 2011 =E0 19:10, James Snell a =E9crit : > For review = (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-embed-document-01.txt) >=20 > Type name: > application > Subtype name: > embed+json > Required parameters: > None. > Optional parameters: > None. > Encoding considerations: > Identical to those of "application/json" as described > in [RFC4627], Section 6. > Security considerations: > As defined in this specification. In addition, as > this media type uses the "+json" convention, it > shares the same security considerations as described > in [RFC4627], Section 6. > Interoperability considerations: > There are no known interoperability issues. > Published specification: > This specification. > Applications that use this media type: > OpenSocial 2.0 (http://opensocial.org) > Apache Shindig (http://shindig.apache.org) > Additional information: > Magic number(s): > As specified for "application/json" in [RFC4627], > Section 6. > File extension(s): > .embed > Macintosh file type code(s): > TEXT > Person & email address to contact for further information: > James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) > Intended usage: > COMMON > Restrictions on usage: > None > Author: > James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) > Change controller: > IESG >=20 > Thank you, >=20 > - James > _______________________________________________ > ietf-types mailing list > ietf-types@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-types Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id A3C1421F8A23 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:47:38 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.829 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.829 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.230, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id cLyadhl+xeQO for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora3.lax.icann.org (pechora3.icann.org [208.77.188.38]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id C740221F8A30 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:47:37 -0700 (PDT) Received: from relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk (relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.161]) by pechora3.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7OAmBEi031801 for ; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:48:31 -0700 Received: from smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1QwB0B-000423-1J; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:48:07 +0100 Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=Eskarina.local) by smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QwB0A-0003aP-5e; Wed, 24 Aug 2011 11:48:07 +0100 Message-ID: <4E54C6D4.5030605@ninebynine.org> Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 10:39:32 +0100 From: Graham Klyne User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: Mark Baker References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Oxford-Username: zool0635 X-Greylist: Delayed for 24:27:18 by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora3.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.38]); Wed, 24 Aug 2011 03:48:32 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Wed, 24 Aug 2011 10:47:38 -0000 On 23/08/2011 22:24, Mark Baker wrote: > On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >> On 23/08/2011 00:04, James Snell wrote: >>> >>> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne >>> wrote: >>>> >>>> [snip] >>>> >>>> Hmmm... >>>> >>>> 1. What is the point? Why not just use existing MIME type >>>> application/json? >>>> What, if anything, is the difference? >>>> >>> >>> The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a >>> multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to >>> contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be >>> able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an >>> embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other >>> random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse >>> the JSON first to make that determination. >> >> That makes more sense to me. It might be worth drawing that out a bit. > > I wouldn't think that necessary. New data formats should define their > own media type so that messages remain self-descriptive. Mark, I'm not sure what you're disagreeing with here. Maybe I was being too terse? I was just suggesting that the registration document include something akin to the above paragraph to make the purpose and intended use of the new content type clearer. #g -- > In XML-land, some people believed that XML namespaces meant that > application/xml was all you ever needed for a media type, as the > namespace URI could be used to identify the specification to be used > to interpret the meaning of the message. Though RFC 3023 warns against > such an interpretation, there's no namespace-like grounding mechanism > in JSON. IMO, that makes 'application/json' a suitable media type if > and only if you control both ends of the pipe (e.g. an HTML script > that uses XHR to retrieve JSON from the same origin that delivered the > HTML). > >> I recall reading that "vendor" is intended to be interpreted very broadly, >> to include non-commercial organizations. I expect that OpenSocial would >> count in that respect. > > +1 > > Using the vendor tree would also address another concern I had; that > "embed" is an extremely generic name that could have many alternate, > valid meanings in the context of structured data exchange. > > Mark. > _______________________________________________ > ietf-types mailing list > ietf-types@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-types > Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id E022E21F8CB3 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:23:20 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -102.977 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-102.977 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_00=-2.599, FM_FORGED_GMAIL=0.622, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1, USER_IN_WHITELIST=-100] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id 47-D4LuMQxvf for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:23:20 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora7.dc.icann.org (pechora7.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 4600721F8CA6 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:23:18 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-yi0-f41.google.com (mail-yi0-f41.google.com [209.85.218.41]) by pechora7.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7NLO7bJ031100 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:24:27 -0400 Received: by yib2 with SMTP id 2so428618yib.28 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:24:07 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.179.98 with SMTP id g62mr26946566yhm.2.1314134647047; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:24:07 -0700 (PDT) Sender: mark@coactus.com Received: by 10.236.177.72 with HTTP; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 14:24:07 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:24:07 -0400 X-Google-Sender-Auth: QHZNcMawXv42eqsDrcWdfkcGe70 Message-ID: From: Mark Baker To: Graham Klyne Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (pechora7.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.73]); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:24:27 -0400 (EDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 21:23:21 -0000 On Tue, Aug 23, 2011 at 5:29 AM, Graham Klyne wro= te: > On 23/08/2011 00:04, James Snell wrote: >> >> On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne >> =A0wrote: >>> >>> [snip] >>> >>> Hmmm... >>> >>> 1. What is the point? =A0Why not just use existing MIME type >>> application/json? >>> What, if anything, is the difference? >>> >> >> The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a >> multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to >> contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be >> able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an >> embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other >> random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse >> the JSON first to make that determination. > > That makes more sense to me. =A0It might be worth drawing that out a bit. I wouldn't think that necessary. New data formats should define their own media type so that messages remain self-descriptive. In XML-land, some people believed that XML namespaces meant that application/xml was all you ever needed for a media type, as the namespace URI could be used to identify the specification to be used to interpret the meaning of the message. Though RFC 3023 warns against such an interpretation, there's no namespace-like grounding mechanism in JSON. IMO, that makes 'application/json' a suitable media type if and only if you control both ends of the pipe (e.g. an HTML script that uses XHR to retrieve JSON from the same origin that delivered the HTML). > I recall reading that "vendor" is intended to be interpreted very broadly= , > to include non-commercial organizations. =A0I expect that OpenSocial woul= d > count in that respect. +1 Using the vendor tree would also address another concern I had; that "embed" is an extremely generic name that could have many alternate, valid meanings in the context of structured data exchange. Mark. Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id CD2EB21F84E2 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:15:47 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.348 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.348 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.749, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id Ugt69ZhWFVid for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:15:47 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora4.lax.icann.org (pechora4.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2d0:1::39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id DDE0921F84DF for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:15:46 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mailout-de.gmx.net (mailout-de.gmx.net [213.165.64.23]) by pechora4.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with SMTP id p7NGGXLd027396 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:16:54 -0700 Received: (qmail invoked by alias); 23 Aug 2011 15:49:51 -0000 Received: from dslb-094-223-189-049.pools.arcor-ip.net (EHLO HIVE) [94.223.189.49] by mail.gmx.net (mp007) with SMTP; 23 Aug 2011 17:49:51 +0200 X-Authenticated: #723575 X-Provags-ID: V01U2FsdGVkX19NjZoNyj1Nvb8eYRXhEwdfx4aALbsIC/9uPg5r5m /Uw7heBufbWqtu From: Bjoern Hoehrmann To: James Snell Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 17:50:05 +0200 Message-ID: References: In-Reply-To: X-Mailer: Forte Agent 3.3/32.846 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit X-Y-GMX-Trusted: 0 X-Greylist: Delayed for 00:26:39 by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora4.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.39]); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 09:16:55 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types@iana.org Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+xml X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 16:15:48 -0000 * James Snell wrote: > Applications that use this media type: > OpenSocial 2.0 (http://opensocial.org) > Apache Shindig (http://shindig.apache.org) This should identify the class of application like word processors or 3d modeling tools, not list individual implementations. > Additional information: > Magic number(s): > As specified for "application/xml" in [RFC3023], > Section 3.2. This should say "none beyond" or something to that effect. > File extension(s): > .embed > Macintosh file type code(s): > TEXT > Person & email address to contact for further information: > James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) The parens should be angle brackets as that format is the most common, but it does not matter much. -- Björn Höhrmann · mailto:bjoern@hoehrmann.de · http://bjoern.hoehrmann.de Am Badedeich 7 · Telefon: +49(0)160/4415681 · http://www.bjoernsworld.de 25899 Dagebüll · PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 · http://www.websitedev.de/ Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1575E21F8B27 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 03:43:45 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.058 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.058 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=-0.459, BAYES_00=-2.599] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id O5N-hU1J0z4T for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 03:43:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora8.dc.icann.org (pechora8.icann.org [192.0.46.74]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 2363B21F8A55 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 03:43:44 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fallback1.mail.ox.ac.uk (fallback1.mail.ox.ac.uk [163.1.2.175]) by pechora8.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7NAiFR5025251 for ; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 06:44:36 -0400 Received: from relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.161]) by fallback1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qvo80-0000XJ-49 for ietf-types@iana.org; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:22:40 +0100 Received: from smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1Qvo6F-0001Zj-0K; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:20:51 +0100 Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=Eskarina.local) by smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1Qvo6E-00076O-5c; Tue, 23 Aug 2011 11:20:51 +0100 Message-ID: <4E5372F2.9060603@ninebynine.org> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:29:22 +0100 From: Graham Klyne User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.5; rv:6.0) Gecko/20110812 Thunderbird/6.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Snell References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Oxford-Username: zool0635 X-Greylist: Delayed for 00:21:34 by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (pechora8.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.74]); Tue, 23 Aug 2011 06:44:36 -0400 (EDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2011 10:43:45 -0000 On 23/08/2011 00:04, James Snell wrote: > On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne wrote: >> [snip] >> >> Hmmm... >> >> 1. What is the point? Why not just use existing MIME type application/json? >> What, if anything, is the difference? >> > > The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a > multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to > contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be > able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an > embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other > random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse > the JSON first to make that determination. That makes more sense to me. It might be worth drawing that out a bit. >> 2. "This specification" doesn't seem to actually be a specification. Just a >> carrier for the registration template. I cannot find any description of >> "Embedded experience document" in >> http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/2.0/Core-Gadget.xml >> Appendix C.15 describes many things, but nothing I recognize as a >> "document". I can guess at what is intended, but cannot be certain based on >> the text I'm seeing. >> > > I definitely agree that the spec text in the OpenSocial Core Gadget > spec is a bit lacking as far as defining the Embedded Experiences > format as a document per se. If necessary, I can easily add details to > the I-D that fill in the gaps. I think what you said above would do it. >> 3. "This specification" has intended status "informational", but seems to be >> requesting standards-tree registrations. Is this right? >> > > Yes and I definitely understand the concern. The main issue is that > OpenSocial is not a standards track specification originating from an > IETF WG so Informational status on the I-D seemed to be the most > appropriate; that said, however, the formats defined are relatively > simple extensions of the JSON and XML media types and are not vendor > specific. >> 4. From the limited descriptions given, this seems to be presented to >> address specific goals of "opensocial" - as such, wouldn't a vnd.opensocial >> or similar registration be more appropriate? This would substantially >> address my comments 1-3. >> > > I defer to the judgement of this group on that. While OpenSocial.org > is itself an standalone organization, the OpenSocial specifications > are not specific to any single vendor and were developed following an > open, consensus driven process. Further, while currently realized only > within OpenSocial, it is fully expected that the embedded experience > format in question will be useful beyond just OpenSocial itself. I recall reading that "vendor" is intended to be interpreted very broadly, to include non-commercial organizations. I expect that OpenSocial would count in that respect. #g -- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 11B9321F8C22 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:03:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.927 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.927 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.672, BAYES_00=-2.599, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id ZzieWBJoqrKi for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:03:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora5.dc.icann.org (pechora5.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1599A21F8BF9 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:03:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-fx0-f41.google.com (mail-fx0-f41.google.com [209.85.161.41]) by pechora5.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7MN4FId029521 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:35 -0700 Received: by fxg9 with SMTP id 9so3845453fxg.28 for ; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:15 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :cc:content-type:content-transfer-encoding; bh=l6syF24spQt9tf5FMqPjLfwuYPMq+0wjtQtkUjDNxnA=; b=DMx5FzQx9R7o3qKXS+Mjv41gIhbZUs5p7EUbV6pcpiCWQjI8wkFPavSxcoSxsl1wAO UUDvWwNLEhJAPA7LTTlNa10P0RBUeivlXHVq5tAaWzHLyUEamImeSTn2C9Vvp3zqX00u pkM+DyX/yuNXLfBg+7S/YerMw8X5jpVnOad80= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.223.91.147 with SMTP id n19mr4385453fam.53.1314054254774; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:14 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.223.119.207 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:14 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> References: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:14 -0700 Message-ID: From: James Snell To: Graham Klyne Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora5.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.71]); Mon, 22 Aug 2011 16:04:35 -0700 (PDT) Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 23:03:31 -0000 On Sun, Aug 21, 2011 at 3:38 AM, Graham Klyne wro= te: > [snip] > > Hmmm... > > 1. What is the point? =A0Why not just use existing MIME type application/= json? > What, if anything, is the difference? > The key reason is that we'll be passing these around within a multipart email, much the same way that multipart messages are used to contain both plain text and HTML versions of a message. We need to be able to quickly look at the mime part headers and determine if an embedded experience document is included as opposed to just some other random type of JSON or XML document. We do not want to have to parse the JSON first to make that determination. > 2. "This specification" doesn't seem to actually be a specification. =A0J= ust a > carrier for the registration template. =A0I cannot find any description o= f > "Embedded experience document" in > http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/2.0/Core-Gadget.xml > Appendix C.15 describes many things, but nothing I recognize as a > "document". =A0I can guess at what is intended, but cannot be certain bas= ed on > the text I'm seeing. > I definitely agree that the spec text in the OpenSocial Core Gadget spec is a bit lacking as far as defining the Embedded Experiences format as a document per se. If necessary, I can easily add details to the I-D that fill in the gaps. > 3. "This specification" has intended status "informational", but seems to= be > requesting standards-tree registrations. =A0Is this right? > Yes and I definitely understand the concern. The main issue is that OpenSocial is not a standards track specification originating from an IETF WG so Informational status on the I-D seemed to be the most appropriate; that said, however, the formats defined are relatively simple extensions of the JSON and XML media types and are not vendor specific. > 4. From the limited descriptions given, this seems to be presented to > address specific goals of "opensocial" - as such, wouldn't a vnd.opensoci= al > or similar registration be more appropriate? =A0This would substantially > address my comments 1-3. > I defer to the judgement of this group on that. While OpenSocial.org is itself an standalone organization, the OpenSocial specifications are not specific to any single vendor and were developed following an open, consensus driven process. Further, while currently realized only within OpenSocial, it is fully expected that the embedded experience format in question will be useful beyond just OpenSocial itself. - James > #g > -- > > Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id AB3DF21F880C for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 23:53:31 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -3.518 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-3.518 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, DATE_IN_PAST_12_24=0.992, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED=-4] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id rsoXMrRMGw-J for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 23:53:30 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora5.dc.icann.org (pechora5.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:71]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 5669821F87D9 for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 23:53:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: from fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk (fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk [129.67.1.175]) by pechora5.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7M6sDPi017704 for ; Sun, 21 Aug 2011 23:54:33 -0700 Received: from relay9.mail.ox.ac.uk ([163.1.2.169]) by fallback0.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QvOOi-00072I-2w for ietf-types@iana.org; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:54:12 +0100 Received: from smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk ([129.67.1.207]) by relay9.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtp (Exim 4.75) (envelope-from ) id 1QvOMu-0003vk-TH; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:52:20 +0100 Received: from gklyne.plus.com ([80.229.154.156] helo=Eskarina.local) by smtp1.mail.ox.ac.uk with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES256-SHA:256) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1QvOMt-0002VH-5W; Mon, 22 Aug 2011 07:52:20 +0100 Message-ID: <4E50E013.6020801@ninebynine.org> Date: Sun, 21 Aug 2011 11:38:11 +0100 From: Graham Klyne User-Agent: Thunderbird 2.0.0.24 (Macintosh/20100228) MIME-Version: 1.0 To: James Snell References: In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Oxford-Username: zool0635 X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora5.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.71]); Sun, 21 Aug 2011 23:54:33 -0700 (PDT) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:31:30 -0700 Cc: ietf-types Subject: Re: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 06:53:31 -0000 James Snell wrote: > For review (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-embed-document-01.txt) > > Type name: > application > Subtype name: > embed+json > Required parameters: > None. > Optional parameters: > None. > Encoding considerations: > Identical to those of "application/json" as described > in [RFC4627], Section 6. > Security considerations: > As defined in this specification. In addition, as > this media type uses the "+json" convention, it > shares the same security considerations as described > in [RFC4627], Section 6. > Interoperability considerations: > There are no known interoperability issues. > Published specification: > This specification. > Applications that use this media type: > OpenSocial 2.0 (http://opensocial.org) > Apache Shindig (http://shindig.apache.org) > Additional information: > Magic number(s): > As specified for "application/json" in [RFC4627], > Section 6. > File extension(s): > .embed > Macintosh file type code(s): > TEXT > Person & email address to contact for further information: > James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) > Intended usage: > COMMON > Restrictions on usage: > None > Author: > James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) > Change controller: > IESG > > Thank you, > > - James > _______________________________________________ > ietf-types mailing list > ietf-types@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf-types > Hmmm... 1. What is the point? Why not just use existing MIME type application/json? What, if anything, is the difference? 2. "This specification" doesn't seem to actually be a specification. Just a carrier for the registration template. I cannot find any description of "Embedded experience document" in http://opensocial-resources.googlecode.com/svn/spec/2.0/Core-Gadget.xml Appendix C.15 describes many things, but nothing I recognize as a "document". I can guess at what is intended, but cannot be certain based on the text I'm seeing. 3. "This specification" has intended status "informational", but seems to be requesting standards-tree registrations. Is this right? 4. From the limited descriptions given, this seems to be presented to address specific goals of "opensocial" - as such, wouldn't a vnd.opensocial or similar registration be more appropriate? This would substantially address my comments 1-3. #g -- Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id D7F1121F8A4D for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:04 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -2.255 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-2.255 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[AWL=0.745, BAYES_00=-2.599, J_CHICKENPOX_54=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id BGvQFY5LXAE1 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora4.lax.icann.org (pechora4.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2d0:1::39]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 68A8021F86B3 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com (mail-bw0-f41.google.com [209.85.214.41]) by pechora4.lax.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7KHAdDr030313 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:11:00 -0700 Received: by bkbzt4 with SMTP id zt4so3019128bkb.28 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:38 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=ZFgaFUpKX8P68kXGD4QLUke8p2SxSB/VrWSnOYIW+BU=; b=wBmu8NUI43Fqaz5WrKJypodWVuWwEHoZ/xdqF/M6AhobW+jXkH4KfDH1Rkk8q8e9/Z y7C9nSpc3slswMqEbBOC9fBoC7GzKOuz/m3kOguS+ke9DDwOYXJoOalsqW+QF4GC7EEc QBE9ZWrWsFmZ+nclKqhPwNxdwT4U+v8+7N9Bg= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.136.211 with SMTP id s19mr230145bkt.310.1313860238557; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.79 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:38 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:10:38 -0700 Message-ID: From: James Snell To: ietf-types Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.0 (pechora4.lax.icann.org [208.77.188.39]); Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:11:00 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+json X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:10:05 -0000 For review (http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-embed-document-01.txt) Type name: application Subtype name: embed+json Required parameters: None. Optional parameters: None. Encoding considerations: Identical to those of "application/json" as described in [RFC4627], Section 6. Security considerations: As defined in this specification. In addition, as this media type uses the "+json" convention, it shares the same security considerations as described in [RFC4627], Section 6. Interoperability considerations: There are no known interoperability issues. Published specification: This specification. Applications that use this media type: OpenSocial 2.0 (http://opensocial.org) Apache Shindig (http://shindig.apache.org) Additional information: Magic number(s): As specified for "application/json" in [RFC4627], Section 6. File extension(s): .embed Macintosh file type code(s): TEXT Person & email address to contact for further information: James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) Intended usage: COMMON Restrictions on usage: None Author: James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) Change controller: IESG Thank you, - James Return-Path: X-Original-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Delivered-To: ietf-types@ietfa.amsl.com Received: from localhost (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 0E19521F86BC for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:08:52 -0700 (PDT) X-Virus-Scanned: amavisd-new at amsl.com X-Spam-Flag: NO X-Spam-Score: -1.51 X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.51 tagged_above=-999 required=5 tests=[BAYES_05=-1.11, J_CHICKENPOX_53=0.6, RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW=-1] Received: from mail.ietf.org ([12.22.58.30]) by localhost (ietfa.amsl.com [127.0.0.1]) (amavisd-new, port 10024) with ESMTP id YfZ+4UNyAUrf for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:08:51 -0700 (PDT) Received: from pechora7.dc.icann.org (pechora7.icann.org [IPv6:2620:0:2830:201::1:73]) by ietfa.amsl.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 1787B21F86B3 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:08:50 -0700 (PDT) Received: from mail-bw0-f41.google.com (mail-bw0-f41.google.com [209.85.214.41]) by pechora7.dc.icann.org (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id p7KH9UMX003260 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 13:09:50 -0400 Received: by bkbzt4 with SMTP id zt4so3018689bkb.28 for ; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:09:30 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=2p47noqZA8jZHceDgz8YB1jk0Tt/1CPBZ1uZt9577LI=; b=SwKxytBas9xkyQk/YQRMNaGWsaUeGSzs26T/ZLNoTuN/63sgDnrhNnqf/md4AFJKNw FbGBIbI/puu6UFGCwXBC/ngUJaAeLh+hqZ842mV3FWwHQIhpIKN4qrVmE+2D5qSGNnW0 oPw26DE02qgP0Lj4n/t0OAkpVckMLW7mio4VU= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.204.148.67 with SMTP id o3mr221447bkv.258.1313860169893; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.204.42.79 with HTTP; Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:09:29 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 10:09:29 -0700 Message-ID: From: James Snell To: ietf-types@iana.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Greylist: IP, sender and recipient auto-whitelisted, not delayed by milter-greylist-4.2.3 (pechora7.dc.icann.org [192.0.46.73]); Sat, 20 Aug 2011 13:09:50 -0400 (EDT) X-Mailman-Approved-At: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 08:31:30 -0700 Subject: [ietf-types] Registration of media type application/embed+xml X-BeenThere: ietf-types@ietf.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.12 Precedence: list List-Id: "Media \(MIME\) type review" List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , X-List-Received-Date: Sat, 20 Aug 2011 17:08:52 -0000 For review... http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-snell-embed-document-01.txt Type name: application Subtype name: embed+xml Required parameters: None. Optional parameters: "charset": This parameter has smantics identical to the charset parameter of the "application/xml" media type as specified in [RFC3023]. Encoding considerations: Identical to those of "application/xml" as described in [RFC3023], Section 3.2. Security considerations: As defined in this specification. In addition, as this media type uses the "+xml" convention, it shares the same security considerations as described in [RFC3023], Section 10. Interoperability considerations: There are no known interoperability issues. Published specification: This specification. Applications that use this media type: OpenSocial 2.0 (http://opensocial.org) Apache Shindig (http://shindig.apache.org) Additional information: Magic number(s): As specified for "application/xml" in [RFC3023], Section 3.2. File extension(s): .embed Macintosh file type code(s): TEXT Person & email address to contact for further information: James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) Intended usage: COMMON Restrictions on usage: None Author: James M Snell (jasnell@us.ibm.com) Change controller: IESG Thank you... - James Snell