Re: Registration of media typeimage/svg+xml

Hello Chris, Larry,

On 2010/11/25 7:16, Chris Lilley wrote:
>
> On Wednesday, November 24, 2010, 9:14:12 PM, Larry wrote:
>
> LM>  Martin, in a couple of places you complained that the SVG registrati=
on
> LM>  template, contained in a W3C document, referred to "this specificati=
on",
> LM>  and said:
>
> LM>  # "this specification" doesn't work when the registration template is
> LM>  # taken out of the SVG spec. Either say "the SVG specification" or
> LM>  # explicitly reference a specific version of the specification.
>
> LM>  However, I think it is common practice both in W3C and IETF, that
> LM>  a registration template embedded within another document can
> LM>  reasonably say "this specification" to mean the document in which
> LM>  it is embedded,

In that context, this looks reasonable, but out of context, it does no =

longer make sense. Registration are often taken out of context, and =

should be able to stand alone, without readers having to guess what "the =

specification" might be.

> LM>  with the registry itself pointing to an
> LM>  explicit version of the spec as well as the template within.

IANA often, if not always, lists the relevant RFC. But I haven't seen =

them listing other specifications. I may have missed it. Anyway, that's =

usually outside the registration, so the registration is still not =

standalone.

> Larry, your interjection is timely, as I was just about to edit the regis=
tration to address Martin's comment.
>
> Given that we already have
>
> Published specification:
>
>      This media type registration is extracted from Appendix P of the
>      SVG 1.1 specification. http://www.w3.org/TR/SVG/
>
> I'm tempted to just s/this specification/the published specification/

Great! That makes the registration standalone, while at the same time =

doesn't look weird inside the specification.

> LM>  There are plenty of examples... perhaps those comments don't apply?

The fact that there are plenty of examples doesn't mean that we can't =

fix it when we have a chance. I don't think it's worth doing back and =

fixing one by one, but if we are working on a registration anyway, we =

can make it better form the start.

> LM>  (This comment applies to all registries, not just of media types.)

Agreed.


Regards,   Martin.

-- =

#-# Martin J. D=FCrst, Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
#-# http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp   mailto:[email protected]