Re: application/xml in ietf-xml-guidelines

Keith Moore wrote:
> What I have a really hard time understanding is the belief that everything 
> should run over HTTP, or that everything should be named using HTTP URLs, 
> when it's abundantly clear that HTTP and HTTP URIs are a poor choice for 
> many applications - even if HTTP is only used as a mechanism to negotiate 
> another protocol.  
Neither side in this debate wins by accusing the other of absolutist 
positions.  Having said that, my position is fairly absolutist within 
the context of my own experience.   It turns out that for 100% of the 
applications that I deal with, it is good and useful if names can be 
dereferenced to yield definitive and other related information about 
whatever the name is naming.  Whereas URN dereference is possible in 
theory it is not widely available in practice.  Hence for the stuff I'm 
working on, "http" class URIs are the way to go.  I can understand that 
there are other application classes where the requirement for stability 
trumps the desirability of dereference.  -Tim