Well, except this isn't legal. Parameters are defined by the RFC, so
you can't just pass arbitrary data with any request.
I had this same idea for embedding other content types within Atom
feeds, but... no go.
On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 12:01 PM, Smith,Devon <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> Rather than defining new media types, I was thinking it would make more sense to add a "schema" and/or "namespace" parameter to text/xml or application/xml. Then you could use those types and append the parameter to indicate the specific structure of the content.
> Just a though,
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Code for Libraries on behalf of Jonathan Rochkind
> Sent: Wed 2/4/2009 11:01 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [CODE4LIB] MIME Type for MARC, Mods, etc.?
> If anyone does want to work on it, I'd be happy to help. Maybe I'll
> contact clay.
> The most immediate and clear need I see is for application/marc+xml and
> MADS could be useful, I dunno. Not sure if a seperate one would be
> needed for MFHD?
> With all the effort on making web-friendly APIs for library
> bibliographic control systems (DLF task force, jangle, etc.), having
> MIME types for these formats will make everything flow much more
> smoothly and clearly.
> Of course, even without them being registered, we can use
> application/x-marc+xml and application/x-mods right away, which is
> probably what I'll do.
> Ross Singer wrote:
>> His point, though, is that you can't tell the format being used until
>> you open the document and try to negotiate it that way.
>> So if you think in terms of content-negotiation and a particular
>> resource is available in EAD, MARC XML and Dubin Core, you have no way
>> of expressing that.
>> Jonathan, this has come up before. Ed Summers and I kicked around the
>> idea of registering these but never got anywhere (mainly because
>> neither one of us was really interested in writing the RFCs). Clay
>> Redding might be doing something, as I recall...
>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:52 AM, Ethan Gruber <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> Correct me if I'm wrong, but wouldn't the mime type for MARC-XML and MODS be
>>> application/xml, like every other xml file? As for MARC-binary, I can't
>>> say. I don't have any of those files handy.
>>> On Wed, Feb 4, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Jonathan Rochkind <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>>> I am actually rather shocked that it seems that MARC-XML, MODS,
>>>> MARC21-binary, do not have registered Internet Content Types (aka MIME
>>>> Am I missing something, or is this really so?
>>>> Anyone know what the process is for registering such? Anyone want to help
>>>> try to do that? I guess we'd probably have to talk to the standards
>>>> organizations for each of those types, rather than doing it independently?