Request for guidance on MIME and media types

[ben at morrow.me.uk]

At  4pm on 12/12/03 you (Mark Nottingham) wrote:
> Note that a specification is being prepared that allows for 
> the use of a similar "resolve the URI to insert binary 
> characters" idiom in non-SOAP scenarios.  The general 
> technique is documented at [3] under the working title "MTOM 
> Inclusion Format For You (MIFFY)", a title that will almost 
> surely change due to copyright issues.  The proposed 
> application/soap_mtom+xml media type is thus a specific 
> example of the so-called Miffy class of encodings.  We propose 
> that a media type be assigned to each such use of Miffy, with 
> application/soap_mtom+xml being assigned as the name for the 
> application of Miffy to SOAP envelopes.

I entirely agree that a separate MIME type is appropriate; however, I
would suggest a more generic name be used, such as
application/soap+miffy+xml, with +miffy being generally used for
application-of-Miffy-to-foo types.

Ben

-- 
   If you put all the prophets,   |   You'd have so much more reason
   Mystics and saints             |   Than ever was born
   In one room together,          |   Out of all of the conflicts of time.
ben at morrow.me.uk |----------------+---------------| The Levellers, 'Believers'