[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OIC-38) State of Interoperabilitycd03: Improper Assertion of Problem Fix in 4.1(2a).

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

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OIC-38?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16770#action_16770 ] 

Dennis Hamilton commented on OIC-38:
------------------------------------

My observation in Description item (3) that neither "Object 1/" nor "./Object 1" may be correct is misleading.  There are two points here:

1. The use of a "./" prefix is either irrelevant or it is harmful, depending on interpretation of how Section 17.5 applies to the case.  Although there is some sort of cargo-cult use of "./" where it has no value in ODF-internal URIs, the effect should be as if it is not present.  There is no shell alias, built-in name, or file-system path searching that needs to be interrupted.  In any case, "./" is for the client to dispose of in resolving the URL in accordance with the URL RFC and the leading "/." probably has no effect.   ("../" is a different matter, of course.)

2. If "Object 1/" (or "Object 1") is established as a sub-document, there must be no file with that name in the Zip, but there should be a manifest entry for the file that provides a MIME type and a full-path entry that establishes the prefix on all full-path names for the files that constitute the sub-document.  By analogy with the special full-path entry "/", my money would be on a full-path entry that ends with a single "/".  In that case, "Object 1/" would be the full-path value of choice in my book.  However, so long as "Object 1" is not also the name of a file in the Zip, it is probably prudent for a consumer to treat "Object 1" and "Object 1/" as the same in the URI.  Producers, on the other hand, might be encouraged to use only "Object /" in the manifest full-path value to signal that this is not about a file in the Zip but about a common prefix on the full-path of the sub-documents constituent files and the given MIME type is for the sub-document as a whole.  (It is also appropriate to forbid full-paths for files that differ from sub-document names only in the absence of a trailing "/", just as it is appropriate to discourage full-path names that differ only in case in the same package.)

3. This needs to be clarified in ODF 1.1 Section 17.5 (or its vicinity).  It definitely needs clarification in ODF 1.2 Part 3, since cd01 talks about sub-documents but says nothing about how they are distinguished in the manifest and what the rules for "/" path separators are.  That will be have to be dealt with at the ODF TC.

> State of Interoperability cd03: Improper Assertion of Problem Fix in 4.1(2a).
> -----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OIC-38
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OIC-38
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format Interoperability and Conformance (OIC) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: StateOfInteroperability
>    Affects Versions: Committee Draft
>         Environment: This issue applies to The State of ODF Interoperability Version 1.0 Committee Draft 03, StateOfInterop-v1.0-cd03.odt (.pdf and .html.zip).  It also applies to the earlier cd02 rev01 and the cd01 rev02 that was approved as cd02.
>            Reporter: Dennis Hamilton
>            Priority: Blocker
>             Fix For: Committee Draft
>
>
> 1. In section 4.1 Priority Areas for Improvement, there is the following item (2a):
>   "When writing out embedded charts, some implementations write out a link to the embedded chart as: xlink:href="Object 1/".  Other implementations write it out as: xlink:href="./Object 1".  Only the later is correct."
> 2. The assertion that a particular case is the correct one is inappropriate in this document.  This is a fine example of inconsistency, but assertion of a remedy does not belong here.
> 3. It is, in fact, arguable that neither may be correct in the face of some subtle rules in ODF packages around how sub-documents are represented in the manifest.xml file and how that may influence what are appropriate URLs for reference to the sub-document as opposed to (the only one of)  its files.  In particular, the use of a "./" prefix in the URI is irrelevant to the situation described, although it might be inadmissable for other reasons related to provisions of ODF 1.1 Section 17.5.
> 4. But the key objection is that such an assertion does not belong in this document.
> [Personal apology: I did not notice this in cd02 (cd01 rev 02).  Since my attention has been very much on ODF 1.2 Part 3 cd01 at this time, it lept out at me.  I noticed the problem with the supposed "correct" case some time ago, but I did not notice that it crept into this report.]

-- 
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