[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OFFICE-1793) ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34N 1078 : DEFECT REPORT NUMBER JP2-1

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1793?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18023#action_18023 ] 

Dennis Hamilton commented on OFFICE-1793:
-----------------------------------------

There seems to be confusion here about the fix needed in ODF 1.2 Part 1 versus the defect report against ODF 1.0 and what is called for in the proposed Errata update.

In ODF 1.0, language is a custom datatype, not the W3C Schema datatype.  Furthermore, under the custom data types list of ODF 1.0 section 16.1, it says

"""
 - language
   A language is the same as a W3C schema language data type, except that the values a [sic] described by [RFC3066] rather than [RFC1766]
"""

It goes on to define (in schema lines 17524-17528):
"""
<define name="language">
        <data type="token">
                <param name="pattern">[A-Za-z]{1,8}(-[A-Za-z0-9]{1,8})*</param>
        </data>
</define>
"""
Which basically allows all the sub-sub-sub-languages one might ever want and matches the syntax specified in RFC3066.

I find it peculiar  that there are far many more attributes defined to have value of type languageCode 
where

""
 - languageCode
   is a language code in conformance with [RFC3066], as specified in [XSL]
"""

yet we have this schema (lines 17534-17537):
"""
<define name="languageCode">
	<data type="token">
		<param name="pattern">[A-Za-z]{1,8}</param>
	</data>
</define>
"""
in which language sub-tags are nowhere allowed.  This is peculiar because fo:language has no such restriction in [XSL].

> ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 N 1078 : DEFECT REPORT NUMBER 	JP2-1
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OFFICE-1793
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1793
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Robert Weir 
>            Assignee: Patrick Durusau
>             Fix For: ODF 1.2, ODF 1.0 Errata 02
>
>
> Transcribed from http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/open/1078.htm
> Original author: "MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
> DEFECT REPORT NUMBER 	JP2-1
> QUALIFIER 	clarification required
> REFERENCES IN DOCUMENT 	Clause 3.1.15
> NATURE OF DEFECT 	The second sentence in the second paragraph in this clause does not allow optional subtags, while such subtags are allowed in the referenced document, namely RFC 3066. Does ODF intentionally disallow subtags?
> SOLUTION PROPOSED BY THE SUBMITTER 	Just reference to RFC 3066 and stop there. Do not say anything about what is normatively specified in RFC 3066.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira