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 '
draft-freed-media-type-reg-02.txt as a BCP
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few
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 '
draft-freed-media-type-reg-02.txt as a BCP
The IESG plans to make a decision in the next
-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
Registration Procedures' to BCP
-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
Registration Procedures
On 12 Apr 2005, at 18:30, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-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
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
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
of
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: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
|
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 data.
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
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
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 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
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
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:
* The
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 very
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 29 March 2005, at 14:03, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Section 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
* 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 text.
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
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
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 '
draft-freed-media-type-reg-02.txt as a BCP
The IESG plans to make a decision in
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 '
draft-freed-media-type-reg-02.txt as a BCP
The IESG plans to make a decision in the
24 matches
Mail list logo
