[GeoJSON] Unique media type for GeoJSON?

[Sean Gillies]

Hi Chris,

application/json+geojson would go against the grain of media types that are
already out there:

    application/vnd.github+json (GitHub)
    application/vnd.api+json (JSON API)
    application/vnd.collection+json (
http://amundsen.com/media-types/collection/)

We could register application/vnd.geo+json with IANA (following
instructions at http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838) which looks
straightforward. We could add application/geo+json to the geojson I-D (
http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-butler-geojson/) but then we're
blocked until that makes it to RFC. I think I prefer the former.

Any advice on the above, Erik?


On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Chris Metcalf <chris.metcalf at socrata.com>wrote:

> We're building out an API that outputs both our own JSON format as well as
> GeoJSON, and we allow clients to negotiate formats using the HTTP Accept
> header.
>
> However, since most implementations seem to use application/json as the
> mimetype for GeoJSON, we would not properly be able to differentiate a
> client's desires using headers alone.
>
> It looks like there has been some discussion around defining a mimetype or
> profile for GeoJSON. Has that gotten anywhere?
>
>
> http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000808.html
>
> http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000809.html
>
> http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2012-October/000683.html
>
> We're currently planning on using "application/json+geojson" for GeoJSON
> output, but I'd prefer to go with whatever already has more adoption.
>
>
> Thanks,
>
> Chris Metcalf
> Director of Platform
> chris.metcalf (at) socrata.com
>
> _______________________________________________
> GeoJSON mailing list
> GeoJSON at lists.geojson.org
> http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org
>
>


-- 
Sean Gillies
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.geojson.org/pipermail/geojson-geojson.org/attachments/20140507/403d7268/attachment.htm>