RE: [office] Question regarding ODF 1.2 CD05 part 3 - path of the package root

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

The manifest:full-path attribute value is not a URI.  (Michael convinced me
of that some time ago.)  For files that are in the package, it is the same
as the name in the Zip directory entry.  For manifest:full-path value "/"
and for ones that identify subdocuments, there are no corresponding Zip
directory entries.

The use of "./mumble" and "mumble" in URIs are no different.  The
manifest:full-path and the Zip directory entries should just be "mumble".
The "./" is irrelevant with regard to relative URIs and is presumably
stripped by clients under ordinary conditions (since clients always form
absolute URIs in making network requests, etc.).  (One hazard of using "./"
forms is that tracing it may require a genuine base URI and that is a
problem for URIs used internal to packages.)

Also, the use of "./mumble" in certain utilities and in shell commands to
force a relative treatment and avoid path searches and also prevent
confusion with internal commands and aliases has nothing to do with URIs and
the rules stated in the applicable RFCs.

Some usage of "relative" in the current ODF 1.2 CD05 Part 3 is without
foundation (in that there is no definition for manifest:full-path that
supports that usage).  There are rules for forming absolute URIs by
appending the manifest:full-path value to a base URI and also stripping away
base URI when it is determined that the URI is a reference internal to the
package (i.e., it is to be matched with a manifest:full-path value).   This
can be done without introducing "relative" at all with respect to the
manifest:full-path value.

I am not sure what the ODFDOM problem is.  If you do exactly what Zip does,
where it starts inside of a specific directory and includes the content of
all subdirectories, you should have the correct paths, none of which start
with "./".  For the "root document" and for subdocuments, you need to add
artificial <manifest:file-entry> elements and given them artificial
manifest:full-path values, since there will be no Zip directory entries for
any of those.  It seems to me that the only reason for a subdocument entry
is so it can be referenced as a unit in a URI from an XML document in the
package and so it can have a manifest:media-type MIME-type value that
indicates what the URI-reached material provides.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM [mailto:Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Wednesday, June 30, 2010 09:16
To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [office] Question regarding ODF 1.2 CD05 part 3 - path of the
package root

ODF 1.2 part 3 
4.8.4 manifest:full-path 

"The attribute value "/" denotes a manifest entry for the package itself."

Does not all path of the manifest have to be a relative paths and therefore
the path have to be "./" for the root document and the package itself?

Stumbled over the problem during working on ODFDOM collecting the base
directory of documents within a package.
All directory paths are relative aside the one of the root document.  

Regards,
Svante