Re: [EAI] Poll for MIME type - revised schedule and details

[John C Klensin <klensin at jck.com>]

--On Wednesday, 22 August, 2007 22:55 +0100 Alexey Melnikov
<alexey.melnikov at isode.com> wrote:

>...
>> Names that contain RFC numbers (which seem to have dropped out
>> during the initial poll) or present or proposed IETF WG names
>> seem to me to be problematic in this regard.  Those include
>> message/eai, message/ima, and, to a lesser extent, strings
>> containing "eai" or "ima".
>> 
> I agree regarding use of RFC numbers, but I find eai and ima
> to be much less problematic. Just think they are are acronyms
> in a long forgotten language.
> In this respect message/dragon might be just as good ;-).

I agree that, in some hierarchy of problems, eai and ima are
less problematic than RFC numbers or the equivalent.   And, if
we could be assured that the entities being referenced were
friendly Asian dragons rather than nasty European ones, I would
prefer message/dragon to either one :-)
 
>>  There is also some question about
>> variations of "internationalized" such as message/i18n or
>> strings containing "i18n": after all, long-term, what other
>> sort of messages should the be that are not internationalized?
>> 
> I agree on this. I also think that MIME is sufficiently
> internationalized (as far as subject and message bodies are
> concerned, so I also fine the label i18n to be somewhat
> confusing)

Indeed.

>...
>> (3) This is the more or less neutral group.  Of the proposals
>> that are now on the table (per the discussion in Harald's note
>> of Friday, 20 July, 2007 08:19 -0700), message/mail appears to
>> be the neutral choice: at least we are clearly talking about
>> mail messages, and not, e.g., IM messages or the like.
>> message/email or message/imail (for Internet mail) seem
>> equivalent.

> but I should mention that I somewhat disagree with John on
> this point. I think using any MIME types containing "mail" is
> bad, because the new MIME type is not necessarily limited to
> email (usenet and SIP might be some other places where this
> will be used eventually).

As I have tried to say before, I am not completely happy about
any of the offered choices.   I do not consider "mail" to be a
really good choice, merely one of the less problematic ones.  I
don't know whether I would classify it as better or worse than
"message/dragon" or, given the possible confusion about
dragon-behavior, perhaps "message/dolphin" or "message/penguin".

       john




_______________________________________________
IMA mailing list
IMA at ietf.org
https://www1.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/ima