RE: No description for image/tiff in Impl-Guide

> Yes, the above is true.
> One could perceive a future where viewers of more efficient 
> encodings become
> dominant and use the need to use two MIME content-types becomes 
> unnecessary.

Sure.

> > > If you you're only sending Profile S or F, I don't see a 
> > need to "scare"
> > > a receiver into thinking you're sending a higher-complexity TIFF.
> > > 
> > > So, I would recommend striking the last sentence above and 
> > replacing it
> > > with:
> > > 
> > >   To achieve the highest amount of interworking with devices only
> > >   capable of rendering Profile S or F, "image/tiff-fx" SHOULD NOT
> > >   be used for Profile S or F; rather, "image/tiff" SHOULD be used.
> I do not support striking the last sentence.
> It may, however, be reasonable to add a note that captures the intent
> without conveying a message that it is never appropriate to use
> image/tiff-fx.
> 
>     To maximize interworking with devices that are only capable of 
>     rendering Profile S or F, "image/tiff" SHOULD be used when
>     transporting Profile S or F.

That wording sounds great.

-d