Resolution for Comments #1 on ODF 1.0 Errata 01 Committee Draft 02

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

Patrick,

please find below the proposal that resolves comment #1 from

http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200808/msg00052.html

The proposed new wording for the last two paragraphs of 17.5 is:

A relative-path reference *(as defined in ァ4.2 of [RFC3986], except
that it may contain the additional characters that are allowed in IRI
references [RFC3987])* that occurs in a file that is contained in a
package has to be resolved exactly as it would be resolved if the whole
package gets unzipped into a directory at its current location. The base
IRI for resolving relative-path references is the one that has to be
used to retrieve the (unzipped) file that contains the relative-path
reference.

*Every IRI reference that is not a relative-path reference does* not
need any special processing. This especially means that absolute-paths
do not reference files inside the package, but within the hierarchy the
package is contained in, for instance the file system. IRI references
inside a package may leave the package, but once they have left the
package, they never can return into the package or another one.

The changes are included into "*".

For this change, we additionally must include the following entry to the
bibliographic index in appendix B:

[RFC3987]	R. Fielding, L. Masinter, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI):
Generic Syntax, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt, IETF, 2005.


Best regards

Michael

-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Re: [office-comment] Comments on ODF 1.0 Errata 01 Committee
Draft 02
Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:06:27 +0900
From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
To: office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
References: <20080821084339.6A15.EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>
<48AD1600.1000400@sun.com>


> > The phrase "All other kinds of IRI references, namely the ones that
> > start with a schema (like http:), an authority (i.e., //) or an 
> > absolute-path (i.e., /) " in the draft errata means either
> > 
> > 1) IRI references that start with a scheme  (like http:),
> > 2) IRI references that start with an authority (i.e., //), or
> > 3) IRI references that start with an absolute-path (i.e., /) 
> 
> Yes, but it also includes any other IRI reference that is not a relative 
> path.

I now understand your point.  Yes, the proposed wording does
enumerate all IRI references that are not relative-path references.

However, please replace "All other kinds of IRI references, namely the
ones that start with a schema (like http:), an authority (i.e., //) or
an absolute-path (i.e., /) " by "Every IRI reference that
is not a relative-path reference".  There is no point in
mentioning schemes, authorities, etc. here.

It appears that "This means that absolute-paths..." in the proposed
errata is not very satisfactory, since network-path references are not
mentioned.


> The preceding paragraph is:
> 
> "A relative-path reference (as described in ァ6.5 of [RFC3987]) that 
> occurs in a file that is contained in a package has to be resolved 
> exactly as it would be resolved if the whole package gets unzipped into 
> a directory at its current location. The base IRI for resolving 
> relative-path references is the one that has to be used to retrieve the 
> (unzipped) file that contains the relative-path reference. "
> 
> It does not include the term "relative reference", but only 
> "relative-path reference". Therefore, the paragraph in question includes 
> all kind of IRIs that are not "relative path-references". This includes 
> absolute references, but also all kind of relative references that are 
> not relative path-references.

Agreed.

> So, in my opinion the problem is not that paragraph, but the reference 
> to 6.5 of RFC3987.
> 
> RFC3986 and its predecessors are defining terms like "relative 
> path-reference" or "network-path" references, and a "relative 
> path-reference" is exactly the kind of URI/IRI that requires a special 
> processing. But RFC3986 is about URIs. ODF supports IRIs as described by 
> RFC3987. RFC3987 unfortunately does define these terms, and I could also 
> not find any counterparts for them.
> 
> Maybe we should say:
> 
> "A relative-path reference (as defined in ァ4.2 of [RFC3986], except that 
> it may contain the additional characters that are allowed in IRI
> references [RFC3987]) that occurs in a file that is contained in a 
> package has to be resolved exactly [...]"

This looks fine to me.



Cheers,
-- 
MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp>


-- 
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.

Subscribe: office-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: office-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: office-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office


-- 
Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering