3 ms·

FWIW, the IANA media type registry [1] lists "File extension(s)" under "Additional information" for some of the media types, so it may make sense to speak of fi

FWIW, the IANA media type registry [1] lists "File extension(s)" under "Additional information" for some of the media types, so it may make sense to speak of filename extensions associated with registered media types. Though given the initial odd wording, it could be anything. Edit: as for what's actually used, looks like [2] it's the ruby mime-types gem [3], which is based on both IANA registry and various other recommendations [4], AIUI. [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xht... [2] https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/65954/diffs?commit_id=0b4e1788d14edaf16e3ce999fd0520b3d2467e01#diff-content-4ed0c03b53dbc8320da88e7887465514cd9e90a4 https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/-/merge_requests/65954/... [3] https://rubygems.org/gems/mime-types https://rubygems.org/gems/mime-types [4] https://github.com/mime-types/mime-types-data https://github.com/mime-types/mime-types-data

jfrunyon 5y ago
Uhh, I'm not sure where you see the word "extension" on your [1], but I don't. Registrants can include info like file extensions with their registration, but those extensions are not registered (not by IANA, anyway).
- defanor 5y ago
  That "[1]" was for the registry, the extensions are listed for particular media types, such as application/xml [1]. Also mentioned in RFC 6838 section 4.12 [2]. And indeed, what IANA registers there is media types, so I've only mentioned associations. I think it still works for a-dub's argument, that it's obvious (though I'd word it differently, such as it being a reasonable guess) that if "MIME type format" is mentioned and "mov" is shown as an example, what's actually meant is filename extensions associated with registered and/or otherwise known media types (which turned out to be the case). [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/xml https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/xml [2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838.html#section-4.12 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838.html#section-4.12
  - jfrunyon 5y ago
    But "mov" is not shown as an example. The particular requestor in this issue wanted to use mov, however no example was shown in the error message. Moreover even in the requestor's case the user has to already be savvy enough to guess that "mov" is the part of "isaac.asimov" that it had a problem with, which is not at all obvious. I don't know exactly what list GitLab is using (because, as has been mentioned, there's no central registry of file extensions), but there are many extensions more obscure and less obvious than even mov, which would further obfuscate the actual problem.

jfrunyon 5y ago

Uhh, I'm not sure where you see the word "extension" on your [1], but I don't. Registrants can include info like file extensions with their registration, but those extensions are not registered (not by IANA, anyway).

defanor 5y ago
That "[1]" was for the registry, the extensions are listed for particular media types, such as application/xml [1]. Also mentioned in RFC 6838 section 4.12 [2]. And indeed, what IANA registers there is media types, so I've only mentioned associations. I think it still works for a-dub's argument, that it's obvious (though I'd word it differently, such as it being a reasonable guess) that if "MIME type format" is mentioned and "mov" is shown as an example, what's actually meant is filename extensions associated with registered and/or otherwise known media types (which turned out to be the case). [1] https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/xml https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/application/xml [2] https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838.html#section-4.12 https://www.rfc-editor.org/rfc/rfc6838.html#section-4.12
- jfrunyon 5y ago
  But "mov" is not shown as an example. The particular requestor in this issue wanted to use mov, however no example was shown in the error message. Moreover even in the requestor's case the user has to already be savvy enough to guess that "mov" is the part of "isaac.asimov" that it had a problem with, which is not at all obvious. I don't know exactly what list GitLab is using (because, as has been mentioned, there's no central registry of file extensions), but there are many extensions more obscure and less obvious than even mov, which would further obfuscate the actual problem.