[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [cgmo-webcgm] QUESTION: ACI DTD and conformance
Thanks, Rob, for the response and analysis. I don't see any need or use for public identifier. Does anyone else? Accordingly, we would add to Ch.9, similar to 4.2.3, a "System Identifier for the WebCGM 2.1 ACI" and "DOCTYPE Example": <!DOCTYPE webcgmConfig SYSTEM "http://docs.oasis-open.org/webcgm/v2.1/webcgmConfig21.dtd"> And make it part of a validity requirement in 9.2.2. (That DTD location has precedent in WebCGM 2.0 for the XCF DTD.) One question about #4 (below): why does 4.2.4 say "...if an appropriate document type declaration ... which points to the WebCGM DTD is included immediately after the XML declaration ... the result is a valid XML document." I know this language was pinched from similar language in SVG, but can't recall the rationale behind the "if". For ACI at least, do we want conforming ACI instances to contain a DOCTYPE or not? -Lofton. At 11:15 AM 4/22/2009 -0600, Robert Orosz wrote: >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 > >--------------------------------------------------------------------- >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
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]