IETF-112 : mediaman
Tuesday 2021-11-09 14:30 UTC
Cullen: You could remove the toplevel type and it does nothing. It is not actionable. Does this matter?
Harald Alvestrand: Multiplexing of types is an application, same name used in different spaces.
Phill Hallam-Baker: If it is used anywhere it is in HTTP content negotiation,
Jonathan Lennox: Someone claimed that some content inspection tools do make use of toplevel type and this came up in the discussion of adding 'font'. Is this a real concern or not?
Cullen Jennings: I think that firewalls may have done that in the past but not today.
Phill Hallam-Baker: Platform level firewalls might enforce.
Alexy Melnikov: Eliminating it is not going to be useful at this point. Is
Harald Alvestrand: We seem to be saying we like toplevel types because they are pretty and not much more.
Alexy Melnikov: Not quite true, is some handling in multipart.
Johnathan Lennox: Two choices:
1) No more toplevel types
2) Anyone can have as many toplevel types as they like
Cullen Jennings: For multipart the sublevel matters, multipart mixed/alternative codes same information. Have to understand the subtype to do any good.
Can't see a use case where you have to understrand the toplevel but not anything below.
Alexy Melnikov: Not quite true, there are cases where knowing the toplevel type allows dicrimination.
Phill Hallam-Baker: 1) The use of toplevel names does not give rise to critical concerns, 2) Filing these new formats under haptics will be more convenient going forward.
No special magic to new toplevels, not special concerns, lets do it.
Harald Alvestrand: Haptics will also occur in other formats because they will be extended to haptics.
Johnathan Lennox: New name is not a concern for new types that would otherwise go under application. Haptics is fine.
MP4 can take more than one type. So if it is video it is video/mp4, audio only audio/mp4.
Yeshwant Muthusamy: Haptics needs to follow what has gone before so if it is haptics and video video/mp4, haptics only haptics/mp4.
Dave Thaler: To Jonathan's point in chat about image maybe being auto-put into an img html tag, if we start seeing haptics html tags then having a haptics TL type would probably be helpful.
Harald Alvestrand: There is probably someone thinking about thatin W3C.
Yeshwant Muthusamy: There is work in W3C on this.
Murray Kucherawy: Is the proposal to adopt this as a WG document? If that happens lets get W3C comment before we process.
Presentation of problem space (Manu Sporny): 5 min
Dave Thaler: Does the order matter or not? Slides and audio differ.
Manu Sporny: Current draft is order has meaning.
Dave Thaler: would have issues if order not significant.
Phill Hallam-Baker: Support work on the draft. The order of processing should be from left to right. So this is application/vc+ and then specialised by ld+ and finaly json
Manu Sporny: There probably isn't an application/vc it doesnt become actualized until you serialize as json
Mark Nottingham: The multiplicity is not likely to be high, is it enough to just say 'can have multiple plus signs'.
Harald Alvestrand: Probably have to specify the rules for +json.
Should there be a process for creating a new toplevel type?
10 for 2 against
Should we adopt the haptics draft?
14 for 0 against
Should we adopt the suffix draft?
10 for 0 against
Murray Kucherawy: Looking for a co-chair.