Re: [ubl-comment] Mime types for UBL 2.1 JSON Alternative Representation

["G. Ken Holman" <gkholman@CraneSoftwrights.com>]

Thank you, Troels, for this official submission 
to the UBL Committee.  I am pleased to acknowledge its receipt.

I have added this specific topic to our next 
agenda for discussion purposes.  I will respond 
to this comment when we come to some conclusions.

We also look forward to any implementation 
feedback you may have regarding the choices we have made in our draft work.

. . . . . . . Ken

At 2017-05-09 14:50 +0200, Troels Nørgaard NIelsen wrote:
> Dear UBL Committee
>
> Tradeshift is happy to see the formalization of 
> an JSON alternative UBL representation in form 
> of JSON (draft-04) Schemas [0]. We are in the 
> process of aligning our own JSON representations 
> to match these. In that process, we would like 
> to differentiate between our own JSON 
> representation and the official [0] using Mime 
> Types (RFC7231, Section 3.1, Content-Type; 
> RFC4288 Section 3.2). While we could use our 
> own, vendor-based, Mime Type for this purpose, 
> we strongly believe in inter-operability and standardization.
>
> I have been unable to find any previous 
> discussion of this, please bear with me if this has been discussed before:
> Are there plans for submitting Mime Types for UBL to IANA [1]?
> If such name(s) has been submitted, what are they?
>
> In liu of any previous discussion, we would like 
> kick it of the following suggestions:
>
> # Universal Business Language XML Canonical Representation
> application/vnd.oasis.ubl+xml
>
> # Universal Business Language JSON Alternative Representation
> application/vnd.oasis.ubl+json
>
> Thank you for your consideration.
>
> [0] https://docs.oasis-open.org/ubl/UBL-2.1-JSON/v1.0/UBL-2.1-JSON-v1.0.html
> [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types
>
> Kinds regards
> Troels Nørgaard
> Tradeshift


--
G. Ken Holman
OASIS Individual Member
Crane Softwrights Ltd.
http://www.oasis-open.org