This draft might change those requirements, it could use more reviews: https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-mediaman-suffixes/
I personally think we should not assume every structured suffix will also be a registered sub type. I think we should: 1. Move the normative statements to a document and out of the registry. 2. Update the registry policy to have specification required. 3. Detail the processing guidelines from right to left, in a way that does not create exceptions. 4. If 4 is impossible, document the exception and take steps to avoid them in the future. On Thu, May 11, 2023, 5:07 AM Esko Dijk <esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl> wrote: > Update to my previous email: as I learnt now the registration of a +suffix > in the SSS registry doesn't require that the registered name is an existing > media type name. (Example: +der) > So +jws could be registered with the registration fields pointing to RFC > 7515 "application/jose+json" as the reference. > > It could also be named +josejson or +jose-json then ? Not as nice as +jws > but at least more relatable to the original media type name. > > Esko > > -----Original Message----- > From: Esko Dijk > Sent: Wednesday, May 10, 2023 16:38 > To: Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca>; media-ty...@ietf.org; > anima@ietf.org; j...@ietf.org > Subject: RE: [Anima] do we need +jose? > > > should really be doing: > > application/voucher+jws > > Because "application/jws" does not seem to be an existing media type, it > would be strange to use "+jws". > Looking at draft-ietf-anima-jws-voucher-06: what it really uses is the > "JWS JSON Serialization" which has the "application/jose+json" media type. > This is not the "application/jose" type, so it would be strange to use > "+jose" as your subject suggests. > Now given that we shouldn't use multiple structured syntax suffixes in > concatenation at this moment, the only option for the suffix media type at > this moment looks to be "+json". > > (Or alternatively we would need a new spec that defines the > "application/jws" media type - not advisable it seems, adds to confusion.) > > So we can have names like e.g.: > > application/voucher-jose+json > application/voucher-jws+json > > In the cases above the "+json" at the end isn't wrong, because it actually > is JSON. (For the earlier case of "application/voucher-cms+json" it was > wrong as you say, because the CMS envelope isn't actually JSON.) > > Esko > > > IoTconsultancy.nl | Email/Teams: esko.d...@iotconsultancy.nl > > > -----Original Message----- > From: Anima <anima-boun...@ietf.org> On Behalf Of Michael Richardson > Sent: Tuesday, May 9, 2023 20:51 > To: media-ty...@ietf.org; anima@ietf.org; j...@ietf.org > Subject: [Anima] do we need +jose? > > > Hi, https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-jws-voucher/ > is in WGLC, and > https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-anima-brski-prm/ depends upon > it. > > In anima-jws-voucher, we defined: > > https://www.ietf.org/archive/id/draft-ietf-anima-jws-voucher-06.html#name-application-voucher-jwsjson > > Type name: application > Subtype name: voucher-jws+json > > which is in alignment with > https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc8366.html#section-8.3 > where we defined: > Type name: application > Subtype name: voucher-cms+json > > probably this was a mistake! (JSON in a CMS envelope) > > I think, based upon discussion about +cose and our other documents, that we > should really be doing: > application/voucher+jws > > While jwt is given as a structured suffix in the IANA registry, jws is not. > I'm not entirely sure if this matters... we are dealing with JWS, not > tokens... > > Please advise. While we have lots of running code (since 2018) for > voucher-jws, it's a > change we could probably make via Postel Principal. > > -- > Michael Richardson <mcr+i...@sandelman.ca> . o O ( IPv6 IøT consulting ) > Sandelman Software Works Inc, Ottawa and Worldwide > _______________________________________________ > media-types mailing list > media-ty...@ietf.org > https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/media-types >
_______________________________________________ Anima mailing list Anima@ietf.org https://www.ietf.org/mailman/listinfo/anima
