Re: Registration of media type application/xhtml-voice+xml
Gerald McCobb <[email protected]> Thu, 14 Jul 2005 14:14:45 -0400
| Newsgroups | gmane.ietf.types,gmane.ietf.xml-mime |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <OF919D8740.C53D7F12-ON8525703E.00547F83-8525703E.006437E8@us.ibm.com> |
This is a multipart message in MIME format. --=_alternative 006437E28525703E_= Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable * Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote: >* Gerald McCobb wrote: >>I asked the IESG to postpone the publication of the=20 >>application/xhtml-voice+xml media type as an informational RFC. The=20 >>registration is not correct. It should be application/xhtml+voice+xml.=20 >>The application/xhtml+voice+xml media type was the original submission. >As I pointed out earlier, I do not really see a good reason to add this >http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/2005-March/000662.html >type. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt notes the possibility of using >application/xhtml+xml for XHTML M12N-based formats. >http://www.voicexml.org/specs/multimodal/x+v/12/ also takes steps to >increase the likelyhood that XHTML+Voice documents degrade in down-level >clients that just support application/xhtml+xml, so indeed, as noted in >the Internet-Draft, the type would be of limited use. I'm not sure what you mean by "degrade." It is true that XHTML+Voice follows the XHTML 1.1 modularization standard and the XML-Events, VoiceXML, and X+V markup is isolated from the XHTML by their respective namespaces. An XHTML+Voice application running successfully as an XHTML-only application has been thoroughly tested on MS Internet Explorer and Mozilla Firefox browsers. However, as noted in the Internet-Draft, XHTML+Voice user agents have special processing requirements including support for XML Events and VoiceXML. An initialized VoiceXML interpreter is a specific requirement. This mime type is limited to XHTML+Voice applications and I don't propose to change the limited designation in the internet draft. >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt >notes 'While it is possible for a given media type to be assigned >additional names, the use of different names to identify the same media >type is discouraged'. This mime type is for user agents that support the specific processing requirements of XHTML+Voice applications. >>One of the reviewers pointed out that "a certain class of error could be = >>avoided by renaming this application/xhtml-plus-voice+xml... I don't=20 know=20 >>of any other "+xml" [see RFC3023] media types that have a "+" in the=20 >>name... a poorly-constructed regexp looking for +xml along the lines of=20 >>/\+(.*)$/ would miss this one." >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt >notes 'More generally, use of "+suffix" constructs should be done with >care given the possibility of conflicts with future suffix definitions'. Are "+suffix" constructs the same as putting "+" within the subtype? A mime type such as application/xhtml+voice+xml that maps directly to XHTML+Voice is easy for authors to understand. I still see the "-" as minus. What does application/xhtml-voice+xml mean but XHTML minus voice. As you know, XHTML already doesn't have voice... Regards, Gerald McCobb IBM 8051 Congress Avenue Boca Raton, FL 33487 Tel. # 561-862-2109 T/L 975-2109 Bjoern Hoehrmann <[email protected]> 07/14/2005 10:21 AM =20 To: Gerald McCobb/Boca Raton/IBM@IBMUS cc: [email protected], [email protected] Subject: Re: Registration of media type=20 application/xhtml-voice+xml * Gerald McCobb wrote: >I asked the IESG to postpone the publication of the=20 >application/xhtml-voice+xml media type as an informational RFC. The=20 >registration is not correct. It should be application/xhtml+voice+xml.=20 >The application/xhtml+voice+xml media type was the original submission. As I pointed out earlier, I do not really see a good reason to add this http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/2005-March/000662.html type. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt notes the possibility of using application/xhtml+xml for XHTML M12N-based formats. http://www.voicexml.org/specs/multimodal/x+v/12/ also takes steps to increase the likelyhood that XHTML+Voice documents degrade in down-level clients that just support application/xhtml+xml, so indeed, as noted in the Internet-Draft, the type would be of limited use. http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt notes 'While it is possible for a given media type to be assigned additional names, the use of different names to identify the same media type is discouraged'. >One of the reviewers pointed out that "a certain class of error could be=20 >avoided by renaming this application/xhtml-plus-voice+xml... I don't know = >of any other "+xml" [see RFC3023] media types that have a "+" in the=20 >name... a poorly-constructed regexp looking for +xml along the lines of=20 >/\+(.*)$/ would miss this one." http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt notes 'More generally, use of "+suffix" constructs should be done with care given the possibility of conflicts with future suffix definitions'. --=20 Bj=F6rn H=F6hrmann =B7 mailto:[email protected] =B7 http://bjoern.hoehrma= nn.de Weinh. Str. 22 =B7 Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 =B7 http://www.bjoernsworld.de 68309 Mannheim =B7 PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 =B7 http://www.websitedev.de/= =20 --=_alternative 006437E28525703E_= Content-Type: text/html; charset="ISO-8859-1" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable <br><font size=3D2><tt>* Bjoern Hoehrmann wrote:</tt></font> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>>* Gerald McCobb wrote:<br> >>I asked the IESG to postpone the publication of the <br> >>application/xhtml-voice+xml media type as an informational RFC. The <br> >>registration is not correct. It should be application/xhtml+v= oice+xml. <br> >>The application/xhtml+voice+xml media type was the original submiss= ion.<br> <br> >As I pointed out earlier, I do not really see a good reason to add this<br> >http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/2005-March/000662.htm= l<br> >type. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt notes the possibility of using<br> >application/xhtml+xml for XHTML M12N-based formats.<br> <br> >http://www.voicexml.org/specs/multimodal/x+v/12/ also takes steps to<br> >increase the likelyhood that XHTML+Voice documents degrade in down-leve= l<br> >clients that just support application/xhtml+xml, so indeed, as noted in<br> >the Internet-Draft, the type would be of limited use.</tt></font> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>I'm not sure what you mean by "degrade." It is true that XHTML+Voice</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>follows the XHTML 1.1 modularization standard and the XML-Events,</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>VoiceXML, and X+V markup is isolated from the XHTML by their respective</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>namespaces. An XHTML+Voice application running successfully as an</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>XHTML-only application has been thoroughly tested on MS Internet Explorer</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>and Mozilla Firefox browsers.</tt></font> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>However, as noted in the Internet-Draft, XHTML+Voice user agents have</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>special processing requirements including support for XML Events and</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>VoiceXML. An initialized VoiceXML interpreter is a specific requirement.</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>This mime type is limited to XHTML+Voice applications and I don't propose</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>to change the limited designation in the internet draft.</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt><br> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt<b= r> >notes 'While it is possible for a given media type to be assigned<br> >additional names, the use of different names to identify the same media= <br> >type is discouraged'.</tt></font> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>This mime type is for user agents that support the specific processing</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>requirements of XHTML+Voice applications.<br> <br> >>One of the reviewers pointed out that "a certain class of error could be <br> >>avoided by renaming this application/xhtml-plus-voice+xml... I don't know <br> >>of any other "+xml" [see RFC3023] media types that have a "+" in the <br> >>name... a poorly-constructed regexp looking for +xml along the lines of <br> >>/\+(.*)$/ would miss this one."<br> <br> >http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt<b= r> >notes 'More generally, use of "+suffix" constructs should be done with<br> >care given the possibility of conflicts with future suffix definitions'= .</tt></font> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>Are "+suffix" constructs the same as putti= ng "+" within the subtype? A</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>mime type such as application/xhtml+voice+xml that maps directly to</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>XHTML+Voice is easy for authors to understand.  = ;I still see the "-" as</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>minus. What does application/xhtml-voice+xml mean but XHTML minus voice.</tt></font> <br><font size=3D2><tt>As you know, XHTML already doesn't have voice...</tt= ></font> <br><font size=3D2 face=3D"sans-serif"><br> Regards,<br> Gerald McCobb<br> IBM<br> 8051 Congress Avenue<br> Boca Raton, FL 33487<br> Tel. # 561-862-2109 T/L 975-2109<br> </font> <br> <br> <br> <table width=3D100%> <tr valign=3Dtop> <td> <td><font size=3D1 face=3D"sans-serif"><b>Bjoern Hoehrmann <derhoermi@gm= x.net></b></font> <p><font size=3D1 face=3D"sans-serif">07/14/2005 10:21 AM</font> <td><font size=3D1 face=3D"Arial"> </font> <br><font size=3D1 face=3D"sans-serif"> To: Gerald McCobb/Boca Raton/IBM@IBMUS</font> <br><font size=3D1 face=3D"sans-serif"> cc: [email protected], [email protected]</font> <br><font size=3D1 face=3D"sans-serif"> Subject: Re: Registration of media type application/xhtml= -voice+xml</font></table> <br> <br> <br><font size=3D2><tt>* Gerald McCobb wrote:<br> >I asked the IESG to postpone the publication of the <br> >application/xhtml-voice+xml media type as an informational RFC. T= he <br> >registration is not correct. It should be application/xhtml+voice= +xml. <br> >The application/xhtml+voice+xml media type was the original submission.= <br> <br> As I pointed out earlier, I do not really see a good reason to add this<br> http://eikenes.alvestrand.no/pipermail/ietf-types/2005-March/000662.html<br> type. http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3236.txt notes the possibility of using<br> application/xhtml+xml for XHTML M12N-based formats.<br> <br> http://www.voicexml.org/specs/multimodal/x+v/12/ also takes steps to<br> increase the likelyhood that XHTML+Voice documents degrade in down-level<br> clients that just support application/xhtml+xml, so indeed, as noted in<br> the Internet-Draft, the type would be of limited use.<br> <br> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt<br> notes 'While it is possible for a given media type to be assigned<br> additional names, the use of different names to identify the same media<br> type is discouraged'.<br> <br> >One of the reviewers pointed out that "a certain class of error could be <br> >avoided by renaming this application/xhtml-plus-voice+xml... I don't know <br> >of any other "+xml" [see RFC3023] media types that have a "+" in the <br> >name... a poorly-constructed regexp looking for +xml along the lines of <br> >/\+(.*)$/ would miss this one."<br> <br> http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-freed-media-type-reg-04.txt<br> notes 'More generally, use of "+suffix" constructs should be done with<br> care given the possibility of conflicts with future suffix definitions'.<br> -- <br> Bj=F6rn H=F6hrmann =B7 mailto:[email protected] =B7 http://bjoern.hoehrma= nn.de<br> Weinh. Str. 22 =B7 Telefon: +49(0)621/4309674 =B7 http://www.bjoernsworld.d= e<br> 68309 Mannheim =B7 PGP Pub. KeyID: 0xA4357E78 =B7 http://www.websitedev.de/ <br> </tt></font> <br> --=_alternative 006437E28525703E_=--