> ... I tried doing this with "application/bitcoin-psbt" back in
> 2019 but it was not accepted...

Thanks for this background.

Based on your experience, we should probably ignore the IANA then,
and just declare a few useful "mime types" (note the quotes) in a
new BIP. We can then agree inside the Bitcoin community on their
usage and meaning.

Anyone want to write that BIP and shepherd it? I can support you
but I'd rather write code.

---
@DocHEX  ||  Coinkite  ||  PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10

On Tue, Aug 31, 2021 at 07:46:55PM +0000, Andrew Chow wrote:
> Hi Peter,
> 
> It would be nice to have mime types registered for Bitcoin things, but
> I'm not sure that it will be possible, at least not in the way that we
> would like. I tried doing this with "application/bitcoin-psbt" back in
> 2019 but it was not accepted. From that attempt, here is what I have
> learned:
> 
> There are only a few accepted top level types, so we would not be able
> to use "bitcoin" as the top level (unless you want to submit an RFC to
> add a "bitcoin" top level). Of the available top level types,
> "application" is the most appropriate for Bitcoin.
> 
> Next is the tree that the mime type should be in. The best would be the
> Standards tree, but it has some requirements that Bitcoin doesn't really
> meet. In order to be in the standards tree, the registration must be
> either associated with an IETF specification (so a RFC) or registered by
> a recognized standards related organization. Unfortunately the closest
> thing to a standards organization that Bitcoin has is the BIPs process,
> and that is not a really a standards organization nor is it recognized
> by IANA. So in order to register the mimetypes as Standards tree types,
> we would need to write an RFC, but this could be an independent
> submission (https://www.rfc-editor.org/about/independent/) rather than
> IETF-stream submission. I did not continue to pursue this because I
> didn't have the time.
> 
> Another alternative would be to use the Vendor tree, but that would
> prefix the mimetype with "vnd." so it would end up being something like
> "application/vnd.bitcoin.psbt". I did not think this was an reasonable
> so I did not continue to pursue this avenue.
> 
> 
> Andrew Chow
> 
> On 8/31/21 2:27 PM, Peter D. Gray via bitcoin-dev wrote:
> > Hi list!
> >
> > I am proposing to register the following MIME (RFC 2046) media types with the IANA:
> >
> >
> > bitcoin/psbt
> >
> >      - aka. a BIP-174 file, in binary
> >      - does not make any claims about signed/unsigned status; lets leave that to the file
> >
> > bitcoin/txn
> >
> >      - aka. wire-ready fully-signed transaction in binary
> >
> > bitcoin/uri
> >
> >      - aka [BIP-21](https://github.com/bitcoin/bips/blob/master/bip-0021.mediawiki)
> >      - could be just a bare bech32 or base58 payment address
> >      - but can also encode amount, comments in URL args
> >      - potentially interesting as a response to 402 - Payment required
> >
> >
> > Other thoughts
> >
> > - some mime-types are proposed in BIP-71 but those are unrelated to above, and never
> >    seem to have been registered
> >
> > - for those who like to encode their binary as base64 or hex, that can be indicated
> >    as "encoding=hex" or "encoding=base64" in the optional parameters, just like
> >    "text/plain; encoding=utf-8" does. However, the default must be binary.
> >
> > - although the above are useful for web servers, they are also useful elsewhere and I
> >    intend to use them in NFC (NDEF records) where a shorter length is critical.
> >
> > - I have no idea how easily IANA will accept these proposals.
> >
> > - current approved mime types: https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/media-types.xhtml
> >
> > Thoughts?
> >
> > ---
> > @DocHEX  ||  Coinkite  ||  PGP: A3A31BAD 5A2A5B10
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > bitcoin-dev mailing list
> > bitcoin-dev@lists.linuxfoundation.org
> > https://lists.linuxfoundation.org/mailman/listinfo/bitcoin-dev
> 
>