IPP> Re: MIME types

IPP> Re: MIME types

IPP> Re: MIME types

Jay Martin jkm at underscore.com
Fri Sep 12 15:16:59 EDT 1997


As I understand it (and Larry would know best), the standard MIME
type of "application/octet-stream" is the universal equivalent of
"go fish" in the web/email worlds.


I think IPP should follow this de facto standard and NOT devise
a new MIME type (such as "application/auto-sense"), as no real
value appears to be added by this approach. 


	...jay


----------------------------------------------------------------------
--  JK Martin               |  Email:   jkm at underscore.com          --
--  Underscore, Inc.        |  Voice:   (603) 889-7000              --
--  41C Sagamore Park Road  |  Fax:     (603) 889-2699              --
--  Hudson, NH 03051-4915   |  Web:     http://www.underscore.com   --
----------------------------------------------------------------------




Tom Hastings wrote:
> 
> Larry,
> 
> Thanks for the help on MIME-type mapping. I've taken on an action item
> to make a strawman proposal for next week's IPP meeting.
> 
> So could the PWG forward a whole bunch of registration proposals of the
> form:
> 
>   'application/vnd.xxx-yyy
> 
> where xxx is the company and yyy is the name of the PDL using the current
> IANA printer-language registration list (from the Printer MIB)
> 
> except for the ones that are already registered (Postscript, PDF, and PCL)?
> 
> A few questions about PDLs, that aren't from a particular vendor:
> 
> for langSimpleText, you recommended: "text/plain"
> 
> and Harald has recommended "application/octet-stream" for the
> automatic sensing, though he also indicated we could make up a
> more specific one.  If we did want to make up a more specific one,
> since IPP is on standard track, wouldn't it be something like:
> 
>   "application/auto-sense"
> 
> and we would have to supply a specification for reference in the
> IANA registration.  Could we just reference a separate appendix of the
> IPP Model document for the meaning of "application/auto-sense"?
> 
> Thanks for your help.
> 
> Tom
> 
> At 22:21 09/10/97 PDT, Larry Masinter wrote:
> >> We also agreed that those Printer enums that already have registered
> >> MIME-types:  'application/postscript', 'application/pdf', and vnd.hp-PCL
> >> should use those MIME-types.
> >>
> >> ISSUE: Should the PWG register the rest as 'application/xxx' because IPP is
> >> on standards track or should the PWG register the rest as 'vnd.vv-xx'?
> >> 'application/xxx' requires a document specifying the semantics of each
> >> MIME-type.
> >>
> >
> >Uh, MIME types have two parts: a top level and a subtype. The top level
> >for most printer documents is "application", unless you can argue that
> >it fits under "image". (I believe that pdf could arguably be represented
> >as 'image' rather than 'application', but they chose application/pdf.)
> >
> >Under the new rules, you either get an unadorned name ("postscript") or
> >an adorned one ("vnd") based on whether the type is standards track.
> >Postscript and PDF are grandfathered in, since they were named before
> >the
> >rule was made; if they were being reregistered today they'd be known
> >as application/vnd.adobe-ps and application/vnd.adobe-pdf, I believe.
> >
> >I think that almost all printer formats that are not already registered
> >would most likely go into the "vnd." hierarchy since they're not
> >standards
> >track.
> >
> >Larry
> >--
> >http://www.parc.xerox.com/masinter
> >
> >



More information about the Ipp mailing list