> Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:20:28 +0100
> From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> | RFC 3555 allows media types to be defined for transport only via RTP.
> | The majority of these registrations are under the audio and video
> | t
On Wed, 13 Apr 2005, Robert Elz wrote:
> Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:20:28 +0100
> From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> | RFC 3555 allows media types to be defined for transport only via RTP.
> | The majority of these registrati
On 12 Apr 2005, at 23:04, Robert Elz wrote:
Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:20:28 +0100
From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| RFC 3555 allows media types to be defined for transport only via
RTP.
| The majority of these registrations are
Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 21:20:28 +0100
From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| RFC 3555 allows media types to be defined for transport only via RTP.
| The majority of these registrations are under the audio and video
| top-level t
On 12 Apr 2005, at 20:51, Robert Elz wrote:
Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:03:03 +0100
From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Sure, but if the display agent is unaware of the restrictions, it
won't
| ever be able to receive the media dat
Date:Tue, 12 Apr 2005 19:03:03 +0100
From:Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
| Sure, but if the display agent is unaware of the restrictions, it won't
| ever be able to receive the media data. The example I have in mind in
| "text
On 12 Apr 2005, at 19:45, Bruce Lilly wrote:
Date: 2005-04-12 11:58
From: Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I have reviewed draft-freed-media-type-reg-03.txt, and have a number
of
comments intended to align the registration procedures with the
current
practice defined RFC 3555. These primarily
> Date: 2005-04-12 11:58
> From: Colin Perkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I have reviewed draft-freed-media-type-reg-03.txt, and have a number of
> comments intended to align the registration procedures with the current
> practice defined RFC 3555. These primarily arise due to the widespread
> use
>
On 12 Apr 2005, at 17:57, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
The rules for display of text media types assume that such types are,
to
some extent, readable without special purpose viewing software. This
is
certainly true for most types, but some existing types have
restrictions
on their use which are
Type Specifications and
Registration Procedures' to BCP
[snip]
I'm quite sympathetc to the underlying problem, but IMO this change
is
unacceptable, in that in order to make it work the fact that
a given subtype is
intended for restricted usage would have to be known to the
display agent. The
whole
> > -Original Message-
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> > Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> > Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:57 PM
> > To: Colin Perkins
> > Cc: iesg@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
> > Subject: Re: Last Call: '
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Tuesday, April 12, 2005 12:57 PM
> To: Colin Perkins
> Cc: iesg@ietf.org; ietf@ietf.org
> Subject: Re: Last Call: 'Media Type Specifications and
>
On 15 Mar 2005, at 21:25, The IESG wrote:
> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to
> consider the following document:
>
> - 'Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures '
> as a BCP
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
> fi
On 15 Mar 2005, at 21:25, The IESG wrote:
The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to
consider the following document:
- 'Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures '
as a BCP
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments o
On Fri April 1 2005 12:02, Ned Freed wrote:
> FWIW, I have every intention of incorporating your comments on message/partial
> into the next revision of the base MIME specification. I like to think we a
> reasonable job overall on the initial set of security considerations, but this
> is one we cl
> On Tue March 29 2005 14:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> [I wrote]
> > > Section 4.2.1 might benefit from a clarification of "text" as
> > > communication in a natural language intended primarily for human
> > > consumption (perhaps something like the description in BCP 18).
> >
> > Perhaps, but t
On Tue March 29 2005 14:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[I wrote]
> > Section 4.2.1 might benefit from a clarification of "text" as
> > communication in a natural language intended primarily for human
> > consumption (perhaps something like the description in BCP 18).
>
> Perhaps, but this text was
On Wed March 30 2005 13:07, Bob Braden wrote:
> For RFC publication, RFC Editor does use a spell checker, which no
> doubt has a US bias. We do try for consistency. but we also try to
> allow consistent non-US usage. In either case, we are less than perfect,
> but we try.
Joe Abley wrote:
> *
Joe Abley wrote:
> The approach of choosing the spelling with the least number
> of letters, word-by-word, might well approximate the
> convention of using US English throughout.
Not for "centre". "Shorter is always better" was only a joke,
Ned is the author, he can pick any correct spelling he
>The "spelling error" comments above are attributed to "The IESG".
"The IESG" authored the Last Call message to which the "spelling error"
comments were a reply. Ned quoted Bruce's attribution with no
attribution (but it was indented with a ">" prefix.)
Bill
_
*> The approach of choosing the spelling with the least number of letters,
*> word-by-word, might well approximate the convention of using US English
*> throughout. However, that goal (if chosen) might be better achieved by
*> installing a US English dictionary and spell-checking the te
On 29 March 2005, at 14:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Section ÙÙ heading in table of contents and in the actual section
contains a spelling error: "Acknowledgements" should be
"Acknowledgments".
According to two dictionaries I checked (Random House and Ultralingua)
both
spelling are acceptable. But
> On Tue March 15 2005 16:25, The IESG wrote:
> > The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
> > following document:
> >
> > - 'Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures '
> > as a BCP
> >
> > The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks,
On Tue March 15 2005 16:25, The IESG wrote:
> The IESG has received a request from an individual submitter to consider the
> following document:
>
> - 'Media Type Specifications and Registration Procedures '
> as a BCP
>
> The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
24 matches
Mail list logo
