ietf-822
[Top] [All Lists]

Re: reason for application/iotp-xml (was RE: Registration of MIME med ia type APPLICATION/IOTP)

2000-03-16 05:11:55
In <01JN1YDCSWQ800004D(_at_)MAUVE(_dot_)INNOSOFT(_dot_)COM> 
ned(_dot_)freed(_at_)innosoft(_dot_)com writes:


Then in that case the proper method is to say
     Content-Type: application/xml; xml-type=iotp

And if there exist engines that do not underatand parameters, then they
are broken (but at least they will default to treating it as generic xml).

Unfortunately, the majority of MIME dispatchers fall into this category. So
much so that they cannot be ignored. You can complain about their brokenness
all you want but it isn't accomplishing anything.

Then if someone wants to dispatch iotp, and have it recognised as
something better than just xml, he will upgrade to a better dispatcher.
But he is only 1 in 1,000,000 of the worldwide users of email, and so the
rest of them can carry on using the old dispatchers for many years without
problem.

That illustrates a general principle with regard to user agents. If there
is some new functionality on offer, the marketplace will surely provide
products to support it. Those that require the new functionality will
happily buy the new products. Those who don't need it won't bother.

You can afford to take decisions that require people to use the proper
user agents. What you can't do, OTOH, is to take decisions that break the
underlying transport mechanisms - those indeed takes many years to filter
through.

-- 
Charles H. Lindsey ---------At Home, doing my own thing------------------------
Email:     chl(_at_)clw(_dot_)cs(_dot_)man(_dot_)ac(_dot_)uk  Web:   
http://www.cs.man.ac.uk/~chl
Voice/Fax: +44 161 437 4506      Snail: 5 Clerewood Ave, CHEADLE, SK8 3JU, U.K.
PGP: 2C15F1A9     Fingerprint: 73 6D C2 51 93 A0 01 E7  65 E8 64 7E 14 A4 AB A5

<Prev in Thread] Current Thread [Next in Thread>