Subject: Re: Mime-types
From: WJCarpenter (bill-abisource@carpenter.ORG)
Date: Mon Feb 12 2001 - 01:52:55 CST
paul> Hmm. I hate to ask you to take on the larger project for overly
paul> frivolous reasons, but I'm not eager to jump through the .vnd
paul> "escape hatch" just yet.
[[most of rest of stuff deleted]]
Sorry, but I think your reasons are essentially frivolous. They sound
like not much more than "my pet project is better than everybody
else's pet project, and it deserves special treatment":
paul> We want the .abw format to be as ubiquitous as RTF or HTML, or
paul> even more so.
I see really only the slimest sliver of a chance that this could
actually happen (I don't actually give much chance to any of the
various "common WP file formats" other than RTF. If it did, then
another subtype could be registered when the appropriateness might be
obvious to an impartial observer.
I'm sure Microsoft feels the same way about their stuff, and they
could actually point to momentum in that direction. (BTW,
application/msword was registered before RFC-2048 and grandfathered.
Other MS subtypes are "vnd.")
I'll do this, though ... I'll check into it and if the RFC-2048
procedures are just dusty things that nobody follows anyhow, then I'll
give it the old college try to get the non-"vnd." subtypes registered.
OTOH, if the spirit of RFC-2048 still holds water, well, I don't
really want to be a part of subverting what is a clearly laid out and
reasonable policy.
In that latter case, I'm still more than willing to do the legwork of
registering the "vnd." subtypes.
-- bill@carpenter.ORG (WJCarpenter) PGP 0x91865119 38 95 1B 69 C9 C6 3D 25 73 46 32 04 69 D6 ED F3
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b25 : Mon Feb 12 2001 - 01:51:41 CST