OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Re: [office-comment] Proposed resolution to public comment #10


"Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote on 06/30/2008 11:13:33 AM:

> 2008/6/30 Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>:
> > +1 [;<).  - Dennis
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200806/msg00065.html
> > From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com]
> > Sent: Sunday, June 29, 2008 12:40
> > To: office@lists.oasis-open.org; office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
> > Subject: [office-comment] Proposed resolution to public comment #10
> >
> >
> > I proposed that this be replaced by:
> >
> > "Table 1 lists the namespace prefixes this specification uses when
> > referring to elements and attributes in the various ODF namespaces.
> > Conforming ODF documents may substitute other namespace prefixes, 
bound to
> > the listed  namespace URN's, in accordance with the Namespaces in XML
> > specification [xml-names]."
> 
> 
> 
> 
> Perhaps add a requirement for namespace well-formed as per
> http://www.w3.org/TR/xml-names/#Conformance
> 

I'm thinking that the phrase "in accordance with the Namespaces in XML 
specification..." would cover that.  Would stating it as "in conformance 
with..." be clearer?

-Rob


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]