Media Type Maintenance
charter-ietf-mediaman-01

[Ballot comment]
It is frequently unclear that committing to have WG work be "based"
on a specific individual I-D is warranted, as opposed to using it as
input, etc.

Are there pending proposals relating to media types for programming
languages that motivate prioritizing such work over reviewing the
structure of the registry and the registration procedures?

[Ballot comment]
A minor edit has been proposed and appears to have consensus, which I'll fold in before this gets approved.  This would be:

OLD:
* Consider any issues around media types for programming languages.

NEW:
* Consider any issues around media types for programming languages and data definition languages such as YANG.

[Ballot comment]
I share Rob's concerns about creating a WG for a rather small (to my eyes) work.

I really wonder about the inclusion of draft-muthusamy-dispatch-haptics as a work items for this WG. Why make an exception ? I guess that this I-D was the starting point starting the discussion but it feels really like out of topic and including it in the charter is really weird.

-éric

[Ballot comment]
I have no objection to the work that is proposed here, or the charter text.  But I wonder whether it might be useful to have a broader discussion about the number of WGs that we have (or are creating), and whether creating lots of small focused WGs ends up making scheduling harder and increases the number of conflicts.

[Ballot comment]
It is frequently unclear that committing to "base" WG work on a specific
individual I-D is warranted, as opposed to using it as input, etc.

Are there pending proposals relating to media types for programming
languages that motivate prioritizing such work over reviewing the
structure of the registry and the registration procedures?

[Ballot comment]
    This last item will consider the existing use of GitHub for managing
    registrations and the processing queues for the “link relations” and “well
    known URIs” registries as examples.

One minor comment: should this be "Link Relations Type" registry https://www.iana.org/assignments/link-relations/link-relations.xhtml#link-relations-1 , and (minor typo) "Well-Known URIs" registry https://www.iana.org/assignments/well-known-uris/well-known-uris.xhtml#well-known-uris-1?

Francesca