Example Media Types for Use in Documentation
RFC 4735

Note: This ballot was opened for revision 05 and is now closed.

Lars Eggert No Objection

(Cullen Jennings; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -)
No email
send info

(Magnus Westerlund; former steering group member) (was Discuss, Yes) Yes

Yes ()
No email
send info

(Sam Hartman; former steering group member) Yes

Yes ( for -)
No email
send info

(Bill Fenner; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Brian Carpenter; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Dan Romascanu; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2006-05-10 for -)
No email
send info
It is not clear to me why this document is on track for Proposed Standard. I can hardly see how it can be checked vs. criteria of progressing on standards track. Section 5 says 'The 'example' media type and subtypes are defined for use in documentation only.'. RFC4288 - a BCP itself - says in Section 3.1 'In the case of registration for the IETF itself, the registration proposal MUST be published as an RFC' without making a statement about the need for a standards track RFC. Maybe there are some other considerations of consistency, or some precedents that escape me.

(David Kessens; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Jari Arkko; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Jon Peterson; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Lisa Dusseault; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection (2006-05-10 for -)
No email
send info
I understand that there has been a bunch of discussion in a couple WGs about whether it's OK for documents to use unregistered example MIME types, and that has prompted this proposal.  While I think that the original document critique is a stupid concern and over-literalist, I'm OK with the example types being registered if it stops the time-wasting discussions.

(Mark Townsley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Ross Callon; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Russ Housley; former steering group member) No Objection

No Objection ( for -)
No email
send info

(Ted Hardie; former steering group member) (was Discuss) No Objection

No Objection ()
No email
send info