On 02/11/2020 10:02, TEC wrote: > I think there are absolutely some benefits for Org users. I am > personally interested in registering Org as an IANA MIME type.
I don't think that registering Org as IANA MIME type will have the consequences you hope it has. > What will this do? Well, for starters I'd like to be able to > attach org > files without the type being recognised as > "application/vnd.lotus-organizer" 🤢. This is not governed by the presence of an MIME type for Org, but by the mechanism that assigns a MIME type to the file when it is attached tp a message, and this is independent of the IANA MIME type database. You (most probably) already can configure your email client (or operative system) to use "text/x-org" as the mime type for files with extension ".org". Having a IANA MIME type, would only make using "text/org" a bit more "right" (there is nothing that stops you from using the "text/org" mime type without it being registered). If you want the association to be automatic, you need to convince the maintainers of the MIME type association databases to change their defaults. And this is a rather long list of people you have to interact with and convince that "text/org" is a better choice than "application/vnd.lotus-organizer" as the default MIME type for ".org" files. Finally, even if you get your attachment automatically tagged as "text/org", the receiving side needs to have a mime type handler configured to display it. As far as I know, not even Emacs (on the platforms that allow it) registers itself as an handler for any MIME type. Therefore, what you get, assuming that the mail client on the other side behaves correctly and uses "text/*" as a fallback for "text/org" is that your attachment will be displayed in a generic text editor. > I also think it's to our benefit that non-Emacsers become more > comfortable with seeing an org file --- as I see it that improves > our > chances that we can directly share Org files with them, which they > might > be comfortable editing and sending back for example, or that a > generic > tool might think to support Org files. I send Org files as "text/plain" (often even using ".txt" extension to avoid confusion on the receiving side) and I think this is the best choice as it puts the least burden on the receiving side to consume the content and it is displayed inline by most email clients. > So I'd like to assure you that my interest in improving > recognition and > support for Org is motivated by selfish reasons 😛 which just so > happen > to potentially benefit non-Emacsers. I don't think that registering "text/org" with the IANA will have the consequences that you hope it has. Cheers, Dan
