Larry,
Thanks for the help on MIME-type mapping. I've taken on an action item
to make a strawman proposal for next week's IPP meeting.
So could the PWG forward a whole bunch of registration proposals of the
form:
'application/vnd.xxx-yyy
where xxx is the company and yyy is the name of the PDL using the current
IANA printer-language registration list (from the Printer MIB)
except for the ones that are already registered (Postscript, PDF, and PCL)?
A few questions about PDLs, that aren't from a particular vendor:
for langSimpleText, you recommended: "text/plain"
and Harald has recommended "application/octet-stream" for the
automatic sensing, though he also indicated we could make up a
more specific one. If we did want to make up a more specific one,
since IPP is on standard track, wouldn't it be something like:
"application/auto-sense"
and we would have to supply a specification for reference in the
IANA registration. Could we just reference a separate appendix of the
IPP Model document for the meaning of "application/auto-sense"?
Thanks for your help.
Tom
At 22:21 09/10/97 PDT, Larry Masinter wrote:
>> We also agreed that those Printer enums that already have registered
>> MIME-types: 'application/postscript', 'application/pdf', and vnd.hp-PCL
>> should use those MIME-types.
>>>> ISSUE: Should the PWG register the rest as 'application/xxx' because IPP is
>> on standards track or should the PWG register the rest as 'vnd.vv-xx'?
>> 'application/xxx' requires a document specifying the semantics of each
>> MIME-type.
>>>>Uh, MIME types have two parts: a top level and a subtype. The top level
>for most printer documents is "application", unless you can argue that
>it fits under "image". (I believe that pdf could arguably be represented
>as 'image' rather than 'application', but they chose application/pdf.)
>>Under the new rules, you either get an unadorned name ("postscript") or
>an adorned one ("vnd") based on whether the type is standards track.
>Postscript and PDF are grandfathered in, since they were named before
>the
>rule was made; if they were being reregistered today they'd be known
>as application/vnd.adobe-ps and application/vnd.adobe-pdf, I believe.
>>I think that almost all printer formats that are not already registered
>would most likely go into the "vnd." hierarchy since they're not
>standards
>track.
>>Larry
>--
>http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter>>