Re: The Font top-level MIME type registration I-D

Dave,

The third paragraph of your introduction starts --but only
starts-- to answer the obvious questions of "why not use
application/ ?" and "why do you need a top-level type?"
Assuming we accept your explanation for the first, it seems to
me that the second is still a little dicey. You've defined two
subtypes and I can think of a handful, but only a handful, of
others.   Unless there will be far more subtype registrations
than that suggests, creating a top-level type doesn't feel
right.   

So, let me ask you, and anyone else who is inclined to think
about this, a question: are there other things than fonts which
could use a top-level type and whose needs are similar (as
described in your introduction)?  Is there a more general
problem that we can solve here?  Is  the XML- precedent useful
in any way?

best,
   john

--On Thursday, 23 December, 2004 13:53 -0800 Dave Singer
<singer@apple.com> wrote:

> <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-singer-font-mime-00
> .txt>
> 
> This was posted a while back and hasn't received much comment.
> I suspect that it is not so much the quality of the writing as
> the fact that many haven't noticed it...
> 
> It proposes registering a top-level font/ MIME type for font
> formats. Note that it is font formats, just like image
> formats, that we propose registering;  I understand that in
> the past there has been some confusion that it might be fonts
> themselves (e.g. font/courier) that would be registered.  That
> would be like having image/mona-lisa or audio/beethoven5th, of
> course. Rather, we propose font/opentype (for example).
> 
> This was modelled on another recent top-level MIME type
> definition.
> 
> All comments are gratefully received, of course.
> 
> Best of the season to you all.

_______________________________________________
Ietf mailing list
Ietf@ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ietf