Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes
draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-08

[Ballot comment]

This was a discuss.

Some sets of octets can be corrected decoded as either BER or
DER. Could I have xxx/yyy+ber+der in that case or what?  I
guess there could be a generic question there about octets that
can be decoded correctly according to multiple entries from
this new suffix registry - is xxx/yyy+zzz+www allowed at all
and where's that stated?

Alexey says that this is probably ok for the expert to handle,
which is fine by me. Might be worth checking the generic
question with the list.

[Ballot comment]
Section 3: Author/Change Controller - It seems to me that having the IETF or IESG be the change controller would make more sense than APPSAWG. The WG can always be shut down.

3.x:

  The syntax and semantics for fragment
  identifiers for a specific "xxx/yyy+json"
  SHOULD be processed as follows:

For cases defined in +json, where the
fragment identifier resolves per the +json
rules, then as specified in +json.

For cases defined in +json, where the
fragment identifier does not resolve per
the +json rules, then as specified in "xxx/
yyy+json".

I don't actually understand what the above (and the similar in other sections) means in practice.
                           
3.2/3.3: Shouldn't this document register application/ber and application/der? Wouldn't that make things easier to reference?

3.6: Should there be a reference to RFC 6713 and appropriate registrations for gzip and friends?

[Ballot comment]
Updated to fix editorial error on my part.

I have the question Stephen has about DER/BER.  DER is a valid subset of BER and that might be worth pointing out in the BER section ;)

Did the WG consider also including CER (defined in X.690), PER (defined in X.691), XER (defined in X.693) for completeness?  I know they're not used nearly as widely as DER and BER, but if this is the bucket to include as many as there are defined shouldn't we throw 'em in?

[Ballot comment]
I have the question Stephen has about DER/BER.  DER is a valid subset of BER and that might be worth pointing out in the BER section ;)

Did the WG consider also including CER (defined in X.690), PER (defined in X.691), XER (defined in X.693) for completeness?  I know they're not used nearly as widely as PER and BER, but if this is the bucket to include as many as there are defined shouldn't we throw 'em in?

[Ballot comment]
- I agree that this document should be Informational

- I agree with Barry's point that the references *in this document* can be informative references.

[Ballot comment]
I encourage changing this to Informational.

Nit - since 3.1 is pointing to media-type-reqs for definitions of the registration form headings, should that reference be normative?

[Ballot discuss]

One question for which an obvious and good answer probably
exists, but I just wanted to check in case and I'm fine with
pretty much any sensible answer.

Some sets of octets can be corrected decoded as either BER or
DER. Could I have xxx/yyy+ber+der in that case or what?  I
guess there could be a generic question there about octets that
can be decoded correctly according to multiple entries from
this new suffix registry - is xxx/yyy+zzz+www allowed at all
and where's that stated?

[Ballot comment]
This document includes completed registration templates for several registration requests, and the document editors feel strongly that these should be normative references -- they are necessary references for the registrations.

I feel equally strongly that they should be informative references.  They are normative in the IANA registry, but not, as I see it, in *this document* -- there is no reason whatever that someone needs to understand, say, JSON or the Zip file format in order to read and understand this document.

I encourage ADs to weigh in on this in non-blocking comments.  I don't think this is an issue to block the document over.

IANA has reviewed draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs-06 and has the following comments:

The IANA Actions in this document are dependent upon the approval of
another Internet Draft.

IANA has questions about the IANA actions requested in this document.

The Internet Draft, ietf-appsawg-media-type-regs, creates a Structured Syntax
Suffix Registry, which (through early registration) has been created at:

http://www.iana.org/assignments/media-type-structured-suffix/media-type-structured-suffix.xml

The draft currently under review also creates new registrations in this
registry. There are six registrations that need to be added, as
a result of the approval of this document, to the Structured Syntax
Suffix Registry. They are:

the +json Structured Syntax Suffix
the +ber Structured Syntax Suffixes
the +der Structured Syntax Suffixes
the +fastinfoset Structured Syntax Suffix
the +wbxml Structured Syntax Suffix
the +zip Structured Syntax Suffix

However, it is not clear to IANA how the subtypes for the Structured Syntax
Suffix Registry are to be registered. In particular, it is not clear how the
suffixes reference above should be represented in the new registry and what data
items should be recorded in the new registry.

IANA Question --> How should the trees that separate the subtypes be represented
in the new Structured Syntax Suffix registry?

IANA Question --> What data items should be registered for the suffixes
reference in the current Internet Draft?

IANA understands that, once the questions above are answered,
the six suffixes above will be registered appropriately and will be
the only IANA action required upon approval of the document.

Note: The actions requested in this document will not be completed
until the document has been approved for publication as an RFC.

The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
CC:
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: UPDATED Last Call:  (Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes) to Proposed Standard


The IESG has received a request from the Applications Area Working Group
WG (appsawg) to consider the following document:
- 'Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes'
  as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-10-19. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract
  A content media type name sometimes includes partitioned meta-
  information distinguish by a Structured Syntax, to permit noting an
  attribute of the media as a suffix to the name.  This document
  defines several Structured Syntax Suffixes for use with media type
  registrations.  In particular, it defines and registers the "+json",
  "+ber", "+der", "+fastinfoset", "+wbxml" and "+zip" Structured Syntax
  Suffixes, and updates the "+xml" Message Type Structured Syntax
  Suffix registration.

Note that this document contains completed registration templates
for the Structured Syntax Suffixes it registers.  Those registrations
include normative references to a number of external (non-IETF)
documents that describe the formats being registered.


The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.

The following Last Call announcement was sent out:

From: The IESG
To: IETF-Announce
CC:
Reply-To: ietf@ietf.org
Subject: Last Call:  (Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes) to Proposed Standard


The IESG has received a request from the Applications Area Working Group
WG (appsawg) to consider the following document:
- 'Additional Media Type Structured Syntax Suffixes'
  as Proposed Standard

The IESG plans to make a decision in the next few weeks, and solicits
final comments on this action. Please send substantive comments to the
ietf@ietf.org mailing lists by 2012-10-19. Exceptionally, comments may be
sent to iesg@ietf.org instead. In either case, please retain the
beginning of the Subject line to allow automated sorting.

Abstract


  A content media type name sometimes includes partitioned meta-
  information distinguish by a Structured Syntax, to permit noting an
  attribute of the media as a suffix to the name.  This document
  defines several Structured Syntax Suffixes for use with media type
  registrations.  In particular, it defines and registers the "+json",
  "+ber", "+der", "+fastinfoset", "+wbxml" and "+zip" Structured Syntax
  Suffixes, and updates the "+xml" Message Type Structured Syntax
  Suffix registration.




The file can be obtained via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs/

IESG discussion can be tracked via
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-ietf-appsawg-media-type-suffix-regs/ballot/


No IPR declarations have been submitted directly on this I-D.