In message "Re: reason for application/iotp-xml (was RE: Registration of
MIME med ia type APPLICATION/IOTP)",
Tim Bray wrote...
There's also an argument from principle. One of the core ideas of XML is to
move past the notion that data should be encoded in a format proprietary
to a product or application. The idea is that the door should always be
left open for future processing of data in ways that are unpredictable at
the time of creation. The generalized -xml convention certainly is
consistent with that spirit.
Agreed.
XML is a meta language: XML-based formats can be defined by providing a
tag-and-attribute inventory on top of XML. XML is a self-descriptive
language: any data in any XML-based format can be parsed and further
processed without any knowledge of a particular tag-and-attribute inventory.
The whole point of XML is to make XML-generic processing possible and
powerful so that development of each XML-based format is easy. A large
number of XML software tools (e.g., XML editors or browsers) are designed
so that they can be used for any tag-and-attribute inventory. Other than
IE 5.0, we have XMLSpy, XML Notepad, and so forth. Generic XML
processing is the whole point of XML!
In message "Re: reason for application/iotp-xml (was RE: Registration of
MIME med ia type APPLICATION/IOTP)",
Paul Hoffman / IMC wrote...
And, just to get back to specifics, the author of the IOTP draft said the
other day:
I'm polling the TRADE WG but it is my impression that there is enough
implementation that people would prefer not to change.
Not only can we wait for "the next one" on this topic, we have another
example of a group that doesn't feel much inclined towards the utility of
the application/foo-xml solution for their protocol.
Since this issue requires balance of so many things, I do not think that
we have a thoroughly thougtout example yet.
In message "Re: reason for application/iotp-xml (was RE: Registration of
MIME med ia type APPLICATION/IOTP)",
Tim Bray wrote...
Having said that, I still have the feeling that if we do all agree that
this is a good effect to achieve, there has to be a better way than
this -xml convention. Media types have been working well in a 2-part
structure for a long time, going to a 2-and-a-half parts smells funny.
But I haven't thought of anything better. -Tim
Nobody really likes the -xml convention. But we have already investigated
other proposals and none of them appear have been accepted.
Cheers,
----
MURATA Makoto muraw3c(_at_)attglobal(_dot_)net