Re: [office] Text for 17.5?

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Dennis,

Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> I should make it clear that under PROPOSAL 1, below, the corresponding
> paragraph in the current specifications is not touched and the paragraph
> from Patrick's understanding is deleted.
>
>   
It would be easier if you just state the text that should be replaced 
with the text you are proposing for replacement. I am having a hard time 
keeping the various posts in mind.

Thus:

****
text in standard
****

to be replaced by:

****
replacement text
****

and now follow with whatever observations, comments, free verse, etc.

I think we are nearly there thanks to you but I would have a hard time 
convincing anyone else of that status given the email posts.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick
>  - Dennis
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200809/msg00100.html
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 12:54
> To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Cc: 'Patrick Durusau'; Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM
> Subject: RE: [office] Text for 17.5?
>
> Actually, I *was* stunned into silence.  Mostly it was because I had
> mis-read Michael's proposal for the paragraph that describes the base-IRI
> rule.  
>
> IMPORTANT NOTE: The OASIS Standard for ODF 1.0 refers to a different RFC and
> uses URI, not IRI.  The IRI language and RFC3986/RFC3987 are only used in IS
> 26300 (and ODF 1.0ed2-cs1).  So we need to word the erratum appropriately to
> do the right thing in the respective documents.  I also think there are some
> edge cases around character-set encodings in Zip files versus in the XML
> versus in file systems, along with the presumption that IRIs are in an
> encoding of Unicode (but may have URL %-escaping).  We need to look at
> tightening that for 1.2, perhaps.  
>
> WITH REGARD TO PATRICK'S UNDERSTANDING OF THE PROPOSAL
>
> PROPOSAL 1:
>
> Make no changes to the text of the paragraph beginning "A relative-path
> reference ..."
>
> PROPOSAL 2:
>
> Boil the second paragraph, beginning "Every IRI reference" down to this
> much:
>
> ***
> IRI that are not relative-path references must not reference files inside a
> package. Relative-path references that lead beyond the package at any point
> along the path must not reference files inside any package.
> ***
>
> OBSERVATION 1.  The "special processing" observation goes too far in
> considering how implementations work.  I believe that the above makes it
> clear enough that only the processor that has the package open can provide
> the within-package navigation, but once a reference leads beyond a package,
> by whatever means, processing can be delegated to the host system using the
> (suitably-adjusted) IRI/URI.    
>
> OBSERVATION 2.  I would love to see 17.5 cleaned up better than this, but
> that involves addressing the portion that begins "The following restrictions
> exist ..." and I think that takes us too far from the problem at hand.
>
>  - Dennis
>
>  
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:patrick@durusau.net] 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200809/msg00089.html
> Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 01:53
> To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [office] Text for 17.5?
>
> Greetings!
>
> After Michael's last post on this issue I don't know if we were all 
> stunned into silence or if there is general agreement so I thought I 
> would ask.
>
> The text as I now understand the proposal (subject to correction) is:
>
> *****
> A relative-path reference (as defined in ?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. Absolute-paths can not reference files inside a
> package. IRI references inside a package may address anything
> addressable by an IRI that is outside of a package or within the same 
> package,
> but no IRI outside of a package may address any location within any 
> package.
> ****
>
> [ ... ]
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to 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 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) 
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)