Jun:
I've changed the reference to RFC3023. I wasn't aware of that RFC.
As to the explanation.... anyone want to contribute?
**********************************************
Don Wright don@lexmark.com
Member, IEEE SA Standards Board
Member, IEEE-ISTO Board of Directors
f.wright@ieee.org / f.wright@computer.org
Director, Alliances & Standards
Lexmark International
740 New Circle Rd
Lexington, Ky 40550
859-825-4808 (phone) 603-963-8352 (fax)
**********************************************
Jun Fujisawa <fujisawa.jun%canon.co.jp@interlock.lexmark.com> on 03/09/2002
03:48:38 AM
To: "Don_Wright/Lex/Lexmark.LEXMARK"@sweeper.lex.lexmark.com
cc: PWG XHTML-Print <xp%pwg.org@interlock.lexmark.com> (bcc: Don
Wright/Lex/Lexmark)
Subject: Re: XP> XHTML-Print media type
Don,
At 9:57 AM -0500 02.3.8, don@lexmark.com wrote:
>The reference to RFC3236 was added as an INFORMATIONAL reference based on
>discussion at the LA meeting.
It seems to me more appropriate to have a reference to RFC3023
if we just want to give background information on the use of "+xml"
extension in XHTML-Print MIME type.
"RFC3023 - XML Media Types", M. Murata, S. St.Laurent, and D. Kohn.
It is available from http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3023.txt.
People might wonder why XHTML-Print does not follow RFC3236
if they see an explicit reference in the specification.
How about add a sentence explaining the rational behind the introduction
of our own MIME type in Section 6.1?
-- Jun Fujisawa <mailto:fujisawa.jun@canon.co.jp>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Mon Mar 11 2002 - 11:04:22 EST