+1. Was about to suggest the same. I actually subscribed to the respective IANA mailing list recently and read a bit about the procedure.
The RFC says that vnd is reserved for commercial vendors, but I feel that the ASF should also be eligible to the vnd prefix despite being non-profit. We should also register the binary formats. Btw.: I've recently added a uimaFIT @annotation for mimetypes too and DKPro Core is also getting them too now. Cheers, -- Richard > On 22.08.2016, at 18:16, Marshall Schor <[email protected]> wrote: > > As people move toward REST architectures, one common kind of service is one > that > runs a UIMA pipeline on some data (perhaps text, or perhaps a CAS in some > serialized form), and returns a result (perhaps in a variety of formats). > > One of the formats that might be returned is a serialized CAS. We have lots > of > forms for this. See the current version of SerialFormat enum. This enum > currently doesn't include the approximate serialization called Inline, and > doesn't include the multiple varieties possible in serializing in JSON format. > > Anyone implementing a service that returns a CAS, has to pick the kind of > serialization format to return. The standard way to do this is to "negotiate" > with the client, dynamically choosing the return format based on what the > client > sends as "Accept headers". See (for example) chapter 7 in the book "RESTful > Web > Services Cookbook. > > In order to permit this, we should adopt some standard media types, and > perhaps > register these with IANA. I'm thinking of names like: > > application/uima.xmi+xml application/uima.xcas+xml, application/uima+xml > (for > both xmi and xcas, receiver has to "sniff" the input to see which one), etc. > > application/vnd.apache.uima.xmi+xml or application/vnd.apache.uima+json etc > > A quick look shows Apache Thrift has registered: > application/vnd.apache.thrift.binary ...compact ...json but that's the only > vnd.apache there. > > What do people think? > > -Marshall >
