Given that <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-murata-xml-08.txt> is
still in IETF last call, I do not think it is necessary to modify your
draft.
Instead, I would suggest an informational supplement with the registration,
or just making a registration straight to IANA (as described in RFC 2048,
with review on ietf-types(_at_)iana(_dot_)org).
- dan
--
Dan Kohn <mailto:dan(_at_)dankohn(_dot_)com>
<http://www.dankohn.com> <tel:+1-650-327-2600>
-----Original Message-----
From: pcalhoun(_at_)eng(_dot_)sun(_dot_)com
[mailto:Pat(_dot_)Calhoun(_at_)Eng(_dot_)Sun(_dot_)COM]
Sent: Thursday, 2000-09-14 07:04
To: Dan Kohn
Cc: roamops(_at_)tdmx(_dot_)rutgers(_dot_)edu; ietf-xml-mime(_at_)imc(_dot_)org
Subject: Re: draft-ietf-roamops-phonebook-xml-05.txt
Dan,
Given that this particular document has already been through WG, IESG *and*
IETF last call, how strongly do you feel about this proposed appendix?
PatC
I would recommend adding an appendix to
<http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-ietf-roamops-phonebook-xml-05.txt
where you register a MIME type for a roamops phonebook based on the
advice
provided in <http://www.ietf.org/internet-drafts/draft-murata-xml-08.txt>.
It would appear that application/phonebook+xml may be a good choice.
- dan
--
Dan Kohn <mailto:dan(_at_)dankohn(_dot_)com>
<http://www.dankohn.com> <tel:+1-650-327-2600>