RE: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION: ACI DTD and conformance

[Robert Orosz <roboro@auto-trol.com>]

Lofton,

I agree with your observation that [1] below is under-specified.  We specify
a DTD in section 9.4, but nowhere do we state that an ACI file must be valid
(conforms to the DTD).  Here are my answers to your questions in order.

1) Yes.
2) This depends on whether we want to specify a public ID for ACI files.  In
my opinion, a public ID is not really necessary, but we might want to
specify one anyway since we did so for XCF.  If we had a public ID for ACI,
the DOCTYPE would be similar to the XCF DOCTYPE.  If not, it would look
something like this.

<!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig SYSTEM
"http://docs.oasis-open.org/webcgm/v2.1/webcgmConfig21.dtd";>

3) Yes.  As I recall, OASIS has established rules for where DTDs are placed
in their public web space.  We dealt with this during 2.0 spec development
when XCF was introduced.
4) I think it is sufficient to say that the ACI document must be valid.
This is a well defined term in the XML specification.

BTW, the first bullet in [3] below mentions XML 1.0 3rd Edition.  XML 1.0 is
now at 5th Edition.

Rob

-----Original Message-----
From: Lofton Henderson [mailto:lofton@rockynet.com]
Sent: Wednesday, April 22, 2009 10:36 AM
To: CGM Open WebCGM TC
Cc: David Cruikshank
Subject: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION: ACI DTD and conformance


All (esp. our markup experts Stuart, Rob, Dave) --

While looking at Don's ACI files, I noticed this:
<!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig SYSTEM "webConfig.dtd">

Small problem: there seems to be a naming error.  In the current-editor 
directory, the file name is "webcgmConfig21.dtd".  (Don, please don't 
update this on the FTP site yet, until we sort through the rest of the
issue.)

Bigger QUESTION:  what should such a DOCTYPE look like and what about the 
conformance statements in Ch.9?

References:

ACI DOCTYPE and conformance:
[1] 
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-Config.h
tml#ACI-conform
XCF DOCTYPE:
[2] 
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-XCF.html
#namespace
XCF Conformance:
[3] 
http://www.w3.org/Graphics/WebCGM/drafts/current-editor-21/WebCGM21-XCF.html
#conforming

Discussion:

First, compare [2] & [3] with [1].  It seems to me that [1] is a bit 
under-specified.

1.) Should [1] show what a proper ACI DOCTYPE looks like, similar to [2]?
2.) If "yes", then ... what does it look like?
3.) Further to #2, shouldn't ACI DTD references be able to point to a 
*permanent* central location similar to [2] for XCF, i.e., something like:
http://docs.oasis-open.org/webcgm/v2.1/webcgmConfig21.dtd
4.) Should 9.2.2 [1] have a conformance bullet similar to the 3rd bullet of 
[3], i.e., something like:
"if an appropriate document type declaration (i.e., <!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig 
... >) which points to the webcgmConfig21 DTD is included immediately after 
the XML declaration (i.e., <?xml...?>), the result is a valid XML document."

Thoughts?

Opinion:  I don't see any big issue here, but it appears that these bits of 
Ch.9 are somewhat "rough draft" form, and can be tightened up now in 
anticipation of this eventually becoming a public standard.

-Lofton.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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