Philipp Hoschka (ph@w3.org)
Thu, 12 Aug 1999 21:07:44 +0200
Graham Klyne wrote:
>
> At 12:43 12/08/99 +0200, Philipp Hoschka wrote:
> It does contain reference to a different MIME content-type, audio/vnd.wave,
> which appears to be based on the same Microsoft file format (but which does
> not contain a definition of or reference to the WAV file format).
what this means in practice is that the two MIME types audio/vnd.wave
and audio/wav will denote exactly the same format, unless i'm missing
something
is there a good reason to have the same format registered twice
under different names ?
> My original comments, which initiated this thread, were in respect of the
> draft <draft-ema-vpim-wav-00.txt> which is intended to register the
> audio/wav MIME type. But that document was not the referent of my
> statement that you appear to be responding to.
draft-ema-vpim-wav-00.txt appears to be redoing work that has already
been done in the RFC I quote. The only difference is that it does not
actually define the format, but provides references to its definition.
According to the MIME type registration rules, this is enough.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.0b3 on Tue Mar 19 2002 - 01:04:34 IDT