Subject: [Webpush] Media type review for application/webpush-options+json

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:41:43 +1000

Copying the template from
https://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/html/draft-ietf-webpush-vapid#section-6.3

   Type name:  application

   Subtype name:  webpush-options+json

   Required parameters:  n/a

   Optional parameters:  n/a

   Encoding considerations:  binary

   Security considerations:  See [RFC7159] for security considerations
      specific to JSON.

   Interoperability considerations:  See [RFC7159] for interoperability
      considerations specific to JSON.

   Published specification:  This document.

   Applications that use this media type:  Web browsers, via the Web
      Push Protocol [RFC8030].

   Fragment identifier considerations:  None, see [RFC7159].

   Additional information:

      Deprecated alias names for this type:  n/a

      Magic number(s):  n/a

      File extension(s):  .json

      Macintosh file type code(s):  TEXT

   Person & email address to contact for further information:  Martin
      Thomson ([email-masked])

   Intended usage:  LIMITED USE

   Restrictions on usage:  For use with the Web Push Protocol [RFC8030].

   Author:  See "Authors' Addresses" section of this document.

   Change controller:  Internet Engineering Task Force

---

From: Martin J. Dürst <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 13:01:06 +0900

Hello Martin,

For those fields where you have "n/a", I think in most cases, "none" 
would be more precise. Also, "Published specification:  This document." 
doesn't work when the template is extracted. Also, "Encoding 
considerations:  binary" looks wrong (but maybe it was choosen because 
8bit has a line length limitation?). Anyway, it would be good to add a 
comment there that the format is essentially text-based, and the 
character encoding is UTF-8.

Regards,   Martin.

---

From: Martin Thomson <[email-masked]>
Date: Mon, 19 Jun 2017 14:17:01 +1000

Thanks Martin,

Corrected in https://github.com/webpush-wg/webpush-vapid/commit/c9e2d0259d2bc6fd3b6

On 19 June 2017 at 14:01, Martin J. Dürst <[email-masked]> wrote:
> Hello Martin,
>
> For those fields where you have "n/a", I think in most cases, "none" would
> be more precise. Also, "Published specification:  This document." doesn't
> work when the template is extracted. Also, "Encoding considerations:
> binary" looks wrong (but maybe it was choosen because 8bit has a line length
> limitation?). Anyway, it would be good to add a comment there that the
> format is essentially text-based, and the character encoding is UTF-8.
>
> Regards,   Martin.
>
>