Dan and Philipp,
> Philipp, could I suggest that you review
> <http://www.imc.org/draft-murata-xml>, which is expected to shortly replace
> RFC 2376. Specifically, I would strongly recommend changing your
> application to application/smil+xml, and quoting the appropriate sections of
> RFC 2376bis by reference rather than by repeating the text.
>
> Thanks for considering this.
>
> - dan
I raised this issue in January.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00315.html
Philipp replied.
--http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00319.html
>However, the use of "application/smil" predates the proposal of
>appending "-xml" to XML-based MIME types by more than a year - I think
>the first Internet draft dates from April '98. The proposal has
>already been succesfully reviewed in the past on ietf-types,
>but somebody dropped the ball bringing it to the IESG. Given
>this history, and that there is an installed base, it seems reasonable
>to stick with the current practice of using "application/smil".
I requested addition of this historical reason in the I-D.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00320.html
>However, in order not to make an antecedent, I would like the I-D to mention
>this name convention and reasons not to follow it.
Phillip oked.
-- http://www.imc.org/ietf-xml-mime/mail-archive/msg00321.html
Phillip, could you revise the I-D as you promised?
Cheers,
IBM Tokyo Research Lab &
International University of Japan, Research Institute
MURATA Makoto
lmpx.com only provides a reader for public news (NNTP) servers. It is not
affiliated with the servers or forums shown here and is not responsible for
the content of articles, which is written by their respective authors.