[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
- From: Jonathan Borden <jborden@mediaone.net>
- To: "Bullard, Claude L (Len)" <clbullar@ingr.com>, ht@cogsci.ed.ac.uk,Tim Bray <tbray@textuality.com>
- Date: Wed, 25 Oct 2000 11:59:23 -0400
Len
> This is confusing. The problem of mime types
> for the metalanguage has been discussed for
> a long time now, even when XML itself was
> being specified and prior to that when
> it was proposed that SGML application
> languages be specified as notations. What
> issues have held up work in this area?
>
The 'problem' with IETF certified MIME types is that each MIME type (or
group of types) needs to move through the IETF process. A major advantage of
namespaces is that they are available to anyone who can create a URI. Using
the DNS system, a registration and resolution mechanism exists today,
problems and all, and software (e.g. web server) exists that can resolve a
URI, parameterized by a MIME type via the Accept: header, into a document.
Alternatives such as Notations and FPIs have been proposed and specified
but as of today no pervasive infrastructure exists to resolve an FPI into a
document. So we have a alternative: a system which has problems but
basically works much of the time, or a theoretically better system which
hasn't been deployed.
Jonathan Borden
The Open Healthcare Group
http://www.openhealth.org
|