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

[Pete Resnick <presnick at qualcomm.com>]

On 8/23/07 at 6:43 AM -0400, John C Klensin wrote:

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

Yeah, I think Alexey has convinced me that "eai" and "ima" belong in 
your category 3: Pretty much neutral.

> > 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".

Again, I'm with Alexey. I consider "mail" *far* worse than "dragon" 
(or "dolphin" or "penguin" for that matter :-) ) simply because it is 
meaningful ("This is a mail message") and at the same time 
meaningless ("This might be a news or other kind of message, and what 
about its 'mailness' distinguishes it from an 'rfc822'?").

I am, however, less worried about the utf8 ones than either John or 
Alexey; I agree that they invite stupidity, but really, utf8-ness is 
what distinguishes these things. Not my number 1 pick though.

I find myself wanting to rate 1-5 on the list, and mark everything 
else as 11. :-/

pr
--
Pete Resnick <http://www.qualcomm.com/~presnick/>
QUALCOMM Incorporated - Direct phone: (858)651-4478, Fax: (858)651-1102


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