Scripting Media Types

[ned.freed at mrochek.com]

> On Sat February 12 2005 22:09, ned.freed at mrochek.com wrote:

> > > > The alternative, however, is to say nothing.
> >
> > > I'm not convinced that that's the only alternative.
> >
> > I was talking about what to do with the text/* types we're discussing. And its
> > a binary choice: Either we register them or we don't.

> Registration is a binary choice, but that does not preclude
> mentioning inappropriate use of unregistered type names in
> an RFC which also registers appropriate types.

> > Well, all I can say is that I disagree. I don't think a registration of the
> > right thing is nearly as powerful as registering the right and warning against
> > the wrong.

> I have no qualms about either "registering the right" or
> "warning against the wrong". Registering the wrong is
> another matter.

You have previously claimed that people will only look at the list of
registrations and not bother to look at the actual registrations. By this logic
a discussion of unregistered types buried in the text for some other type isn't
going to be seen.

You can't have it both ways. And please don't bother claiming that
the lack of a registration for these text types will serve as a warning
not to use them - everything we know about media type registrations says
otherwise.

				Ned