<html><head></head><body><div style="font-family: Verdana;font-size: 12.0px;"><div>
<div>I suggest to not link to the obsoleted JSON rfc, but to http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc7159#section-11 instead ;-)</div>
<div>"Stefan"</div>
<div>
<div name="quote" style="margin:10px 5px 5px 10px; padding: 10px 0 10px 10px; border-left:2px solid #C3D9E5; word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space;">
<div style="margin:0 0 10px 0;"><b>Gesendet:</b> Mittwoch, 07. Mai 2014 um 22:55 Uhr<br/>
<b>Von:</b> "Sean Gillies" <sean.gillies@gmail.com><br/>
<b>An:</b> "geojson@lists.geojson.org" <geojson@lists.geojson.org><br/>
<b>Betreff:</b> Re: [GeoJSON] Unique media type for GeoJSON?</div>
<div name="quoted-content">
<div>Update: based on a look at HAL and JSON API, I've come up with a draft for fields to go into the IANA's registration form:<br/>
<br/>
<a href="https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/media-type/registration.md" target="_blank">https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/blob/master/media-type/registration.md</a><br/>
<a href="https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/issues/24" target="_blank">https://github.com/geojson/draft-geojson/issues/24</a></div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 12:55 PM, Sean Gillies <span><<a href="sean.gillies@gmail.com" target="_parent">sean.gillies@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0 0 0 0.8ex;border-left: 1.0px rgb(204,204,204) solid;padding-left: 1.0ex;">
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>
<div>Hi Chris,<br/>
</div>
application/json+geojson would go against the grain of media types that are already out there:<br/>
</div>
application/vnd.github+json (GitHub)</div>
application/vnd.api+json (JSON API)</div>
application/vnd.collection+json (<a href="http://amundsen.com/media-types/collection/" target="_blank">http://amundsen.com/media-types/collection/</a>)<br/>
</div>
We could register application/vnd.geo+json with IANA (following instructions at <a href="http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838" target="_blank">http://tools.ietf.org/html/rfc6838</a>) which looks straightforward. We could add application/geo+json to the geojson I-D (<a href="http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-butler-geojson/" target="_blank">http://datatracker.ietf.org/doc/draft-butler-geojson/</a>) but then we're blocked until that makes it to RFC. I think I prefer the former.<br/>
</div>
Any advice on the above, Erik?</div>
<div class="gmail_extra">
<div class="gmail_quote">
<div>
<div class="h5">On Wed, May 7, 2014 at 11:58 AM, Chris Metcalf <span><<a href="chris.metcalf@socrata.com" target="_parent">chris.metcalf@socrata.com</a>></span> wrote:</div>
</div>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin: 0 0 0 0.8ex;border-left: 1.0px rgb(204,204,204) solid;padding-left: 1.0ex;">
<div>
<div class="h5">
<div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>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.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>It looks like there has been some discussion around defining a mimetype or profile for GeoJSON. Has that gotten anywhere?</div>
<div> </div>
<a href="http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000808.html" target="_blank">http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000808.html</a>
<div><a href="http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000809.html" target="_blank">http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2013-June/000809.html</a></div>
<div><a href="http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2012-October/000683.html" target="_blank">http://lists.geojson.org/htdig.cgi/geojson-geojson.org/2012-October/000683.html</a></div>
<div> </div>
<div>We're currently planning on using "application/json+geojson" for GeoJSON output, but I'd prefer to go with whatever already has more adoption.</div>
<div> </div>
<div>
<div> </div>
<div>Thanks,</div>
<div> </div>
<div>Chris Metcalf</div>
<div>Director of Platform</div>
<div>chris.metcalf (at) <a href="http://socrata.com" target="_blank">socrata.com</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
<div>_______________________________________________<br/>
GeoJSON mailing list<br/>
<a href="GeoJSON@lists.geojson.org" target="_parent">GeoJSON@lists.geojson.org</a><br/>
<a href="http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org" target="_blank">http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org</a><br/>
</div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br/>
<br clear="all"/>
<br/>
<span class="HOEnZb"><font color="#888888">--<br/>
Sean Gillies </font></span></div>
</blockquote>
</div>
<br/>
<br clear="all"/>
<br/>
--<br/>
Sean Gillies</div>
_______________________________________________ GeoJSON mailing list GeoJSON@lists.geojson.org <a href="http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org" target="_blank">http://lists.geojson.org/listinfo.cgi/geojson-geojson.org</a></div>
</div>
</div>
</div></div></body></html>