Re: Soundbite: Proposed Suffix for XML-based media types

[Murata Makoto <makoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

In message "Re: Soundbite: Proposed Suffix for XML-based media types",
Keith Moore wrote...
 >> All MIME media types for XML-based documents will get the suffix '-xml'.
 >
 >I think it's a silly idea.  There's very little value in generic processing
 >of XML; there's even less value in having an extra level of delegation.

There is certainly some value, since specialized media types can enjoy 
XML-generic support.  IE 5.0 does "generic processing of XML" by displaying 
the element hierarchy.  If we interpret fragment identifiers of XML-based 
media types as XPointer, that will be another example of "generic processing 
of XML". (Does the same thing apply to XML fragment interchange?  > PaulG)  
After all, interpretation of fragment identifiers has not been well addressed 
by MIME yet.

In message "Re: Proposed Suffix for XML-based media types",
Keith Moore wrote...

 >nobody has demonstrated a need for an extra level of type classification. 
 >nobody has demonstrated a need for an extra level of fallback behavior.  
 >if anything, experience with the existing two-level type system 
 >indicates that fallback behaviors are of dubious value.

There is no consensus, as I see it.  Some people believe that the existing 
two-level type system is fine, while others are convinced that it is not 
enough.  Each camp has failed to persuade the other.  Simon's proposal is 
intended as a compropmise.  If people live with it, I think that it is 
a reasonable solution.

Cheers,



Makoto
 
Internet: makoto@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Nifty: VEQ00625