Re: [office] Proposed change to Monday's agenda (IRI's versus URI's)

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

+1 to adding this issue to next Monday's agenda.

Patrick

Nathaniel S Borenstein wrote:

>+1
>(Embedded image moved to file: pic13479.jpg)
>
>
>                                                                           
>             Robert                                                        
>             Weir/Cambridge/IB                                             
>             M@Lotus                                                    To 
>                                       office@lists.oasis-open.org         
>             01/20/06 12:02 PM                                          cc 
>                                                                           
>                                                                   Subject 
>                                       [office] Proposed change to         
>                                       Monday's agenda (IRI's versus       
>                                       URI's)                              
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>                                                                           
>
>
>
>
>
>I've been handed some unofficial feedback from the Japanese standards body,
>indirectly forwarded to me via IBM's Japanese subsidiary.  It appears that
>ODF's use of URI's rather than the new unicode IRI's (
>http://www.w3.org/International/O-URL-and-ident.html) has been received
>poorly, and may result in an unfavorable ISO vote from Japan.
>
>They are also questioning ODF's use of CSS3 and DOM level 3 events, since
>neither were formally adopted by the W3C.  The suggestion was to define
>necessary portions of these specs in the ODF spec, rather than by
>reference.  (IMHO, this seems like more of an editorial comment than a
>technical one.)
>
>I'm asking that we agree to take on this issue on Monday's call as a
>priority issue.  The next meeting of their standards group will be before
>the end of the month, so there is some urgency for the TC to state if and
>how they will address this issue before then, which could turn around their
>vote.
>
>I'm no expert in this area, but it seems a possible fix would be to allow
>an IRI every place in the spec where a URI is currently specified.  Would
>this cause any other issues in the specification?  Any implementation
>issues?
>
>The tricky part might be where we reference an external specification which
>has not been updated to allow IRI's. (SVG?  SMIL?).  If there is any data
>which is essentially shared between legacy URI-based standards and newer
>IRI-aware standards, then we'll need to be careful how they interface.
>
>Do we agree that this IRI issue is a legitimate concern with ODF documents
>in Japan (and potentially China, Korea, etc.)?
>
>Can I get some +1's for adding this to the agenda for Monday?
>
>-Rob
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>---------------------------------------------------------------------
>To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
>generates this mail.  You may a link to this group and all your TCs in OASIS
>at:
>https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php 
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!