[media-types] Re: WG Last Call: draft-ietf-mediaman-6838bi s-06

Hi,

On 02/10/2025 13:13, Harald Alvestrand wrote:
> This message initiates a Working Group Last Call on 
> draft-ietf-mediaman-6838bis-06.
>
> The Last Call lasts for 2 weeks, and ends on October 16, 2025, at 
> 23:59 GMT.
>
> To respond to the Last Call, respond on the mailing list with one of 
> three forms:
>
> - I have read draft-ietf-mediaman-6838bis-06, and think that it can be 
> sent to the IESG for approval with no changes.
>
> - I have read draft-ietf-mediaman-6838bis-06, and think that it can be 
> sent to the IESG for approval with the following issues fixed: 
> (reference to github issues)

I think the document is in a good state, but I have a small set of 
issues that I still need addressing before sending it to IESG. I am 
happy to create github issues for them.

In 4.2 ("Structured Syntax Suffixes"), next to the last paragraph:

    Media types that make use of a structured syntax, or similar
    separator such as a dash "-", SHOULD be semantically aligned, from a
    data model perspective, with existing subtype names in the media type
    registry.

I don't know if this needs codifying, but can IANA tell designated experts if there are existing media types in the registry which might be related?

    For example, for the media types "application/foo+bar" and
    "application/foo+baz", the expectation is that the semantics
    suggested by the subtype name "application/foo" are the same between
    both media types.  Registrations are expected to align with existing
    subtype or suffix names in the media type registry.


In 5.3 ("Review and Approval"):

    With the exception of provisional standards-tree registrations,
    registrations submitted to the IANA will be first given to the
    Designated Expert(s), who are appointed by the IETF Applications Area
    Director(s).

There is no such thing as "Applications Area Director". This must be changed to "ART Area Director" or even IESG to allow for future restructuring.

In 5.5 ("Change Procedures"), last paragraph:

    When a change to a media type registration is requested, the
    Designated Expert(s) will assure that the change controller approves
    the change.  If the Designated Expert(s) find that the change
    controller is unresponsive or uncontactable for a reasonable period
    of time and reasonable efforts have been made to contact the change
    controller, they may recommend to the IESG that the change controller
    be updated.  The IESG makes the final decision regarding updates to
    change controllers.

In the latest version the following text was deleted:

    The change controller of a media type may pass responsibility to
    another person or agency by informing the IANA; this can be done
    without discussion or review.

Can somebody tell me why this was dropped? This is much lighter process that involving Designated Expers or IESG. I think we need both this and the above paragraph.

Best Regards,
Alexey

P.S. I dislike removal RFC 2119 language on registrations. I am not 
looking forward to explaining to registrants that certain things are 
still requirements despite lack of RFC 2119 language. I appreciate I 
might be in minority on this.

Best Regards,

Alexey

_______________________________________________
media-types mailing list -- [email protected]
To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected]