Re: draft-hoschka-smil-media-type vs +xml
Chris Lilley <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.types,gmane.comp.web.smil,gmane.ietf.xml-mime |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On Monday, December 12, 2005, 10:27:14 AM, Bjoern wrote: BH> Hi, BH> BH> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-hoschka-smil-media-type-12.txt BH> is a bit old by now, but I don't think application/smil should be COMMON BH> as it does not use the +xml convention for XML media types. Instead, it BH> should be OBSOLETE and application/smil+xml, defined in the same draft, BH> should be used instead. BH> http://www.w3.org/TR/2005/PR-SMIL2-20050927/ only has application/smil BH> (which is not currently registered), it should use application/smil+xml BH> and point out that application/smil is obsolete, assuming that the +xml BH> version will be registered in the not too distant future. Thanks for spotting this, Björn. I suspect it was copied over from SMIL 2.0 which predates the +xml convention. I agree that application/smil+xml should be the preferred type and should be registered. SMIL editors, the procedure to follow is given at http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype.html (and is supposed to start at last call, by the way) -- Chris Lilley mailto:[email protected] Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG