Last call comments on draft-freed-mime-p4-03.txt

[Martin Duerst <duerst@w3.org>]

Dear IESG,

This are my last call comments on draft-freed-mime-p4-03.txt.

I have read the document and I am glad to see this in last call
(ending soon) and hope it will move on to BCP soon. It will
simplify the registration procedure for document types produced
e.g. by the W3C, and will allow to keep the MIME type registration
template together with the rest of the definition of the format,
for the benefit of all the readers of the specification.

I have found a few minor issues that (can and) should be fixed
before publication:

- IESG approval and IANA registration:

  Section 3.3.2, IESG Approval, says: "Media types registered in the
     standards tree MUST be approved by the IESG prior to registration."

  Section 3.3.3, IANA Registration, says:
    "When the registration is part of an RFC publication request, close
     coordination between the IANA and the IESG means IESG approval in
     effect submits the registration to the IANA.  There is no need for an
     additional registration request in such cases."

  It may be better to change "When the registration is part of an RFC
  pulication request" to "When the registration is submitted to the IESG
  for approval", which would include all registrations approved by the
  IESG. My guess is that this is just an oversight, but it should be
  checked with the authors.

- 3.2.9: "stanards" -> "standards"
- ibid: "require require" -> "require"

- 3.6: "Nevertheless, the IANA has the authority to
        identify obviously incompetent material and exclude it."
     Change 'exclude it' to 'return it to the submitter for revision'.
     'exclude is confusing; it would seem strange that in the case
     of obviously incomplete security discussions, this material
     would simply be excluded. The intent was probably that the
     whole proposal would be excluded from registration, but if
     that's the case, it should be said so.

- 3.6: Overall, this is worded a bit confusingly, and should be
       cleaned up. There are the following problems:
       - The intro says "Vendor and personal types will be
            registered by the IANA automatically and without any formal
            review as long as the following minimal conditions are met:",
         but then the remainder falls back to overall requirements and
         requirements for standards track.
       - The last bullet point says "Registrations in the standards
            tree MUST satisfy the additional
            requirement that they originate from another standards body
            recognized as such by the IETF."
         This is obviously incomplete; add "or the IETF itself".


Regards,    Martin.