Re: ACTION-595 Create a final report on Mime and the Web due in one month

Thank you Larry. I want to check though: without further explanation, one 
might infer that this email is itself "the report", albeit a very terse 
one. Looking at the action, which remains open, I see the note dated today 
(actually tomorrow, due to time zone differences!) that says of the report 
"delayed, came out with an outline today". So, I assume that a fuller 
report is planned, probably by the current due date of 11 Nov? Thanks.

Noah

On 10/15/2011 8:27 PM, Larry Masinter wrote:
>  Finding on Registries and Registry processes (Media Types, URI
>  schemes, etc.)
>
>
>  a) We still prefer using URIs as extensibility names, because of
>  their broad light-weight availability. b) When extensibility names
>  can't be URIs for valid reasons (length, need for review, etc.), then
>  there should be an explicit registry c) The W3C should continue to
>  work with IETF and IANA to coordinate the management of registries,
>  and also address W3C registries and those managed by 3^rd parties,
>  so that anyone trying to follow W3C Recommendations understands the
>  process components d) If there is a registry, it is only useful if
>  values are registered. A registry which does not match actual use (as
>  with URI schemes, Media Types) is harmful, and W3C should apply
>  resources to facilitate fixing this situation.
>
>  Appendix: · http://www.w3.org/2001/tag/2002/0129-mime is
>  obsolete, but we don't have an update ·
>  http://www.w3.org/2002/06/registering-mediatype is broken, and W3C
>  should be held accountable to make it work.
>
>
>  So that focuses of a big chunk of the issues in
>  http://tools.ietf.org/html/draft-masinter-mime-web-info
>
>  The other big chunk was around MIME sniffing, but I'm working on
>  mimesniff in IETF, and don't see the TAG needs to take lead, although
>  updating "authoritative metadata" with a reference might be useful.
>
>  Larry
>
>
>
>
>
>
>