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

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

That's the nature of an external normative reference. 

It is a new OASIS requirement, so it did not apply to ODF 1.0 or ODF 1.1, 
but with ODF 1.2 we will be required to note for each external reference 
whether it is normative or informative.  For [xml-names] we'll mark that 
reference as normative.  At that point it will not require re-stating that 
the conformance requirements of [xml-names] are part of the conformance 
requirements of ODF 1.2.

Our external reference to Relax NG will also be normative, so that our 
requirement that ODF documents be valid to the ODF schema will also, by 
reference, include Relax NG's requirement in its clause 5 "Data Model":

"XML documents representing schemas and instances shall be well-formed in 
conformance with W3C XML and shall conform to the constraints of W3C 
XML-Names".

-Rob
___________________________





"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> 
06/30/2008 03:48 PM
Please respond to
<dennis.hamilton@acm.org>


To
<office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
cc
<robert_weir@us.ibm.com>
Subject
RE: [office-comment] Proposed resolution to public comment #10






I think it would be useful to specify somewhere (I am not digging out a 
spec
and looking, so forgive me) that the XML for ODF conforms to [xml-names]
(assuming that the specification doesn't contradict that) as a normative
condition.

I don't think that modifying the particular clause will accomplish what 
Dave
is noticing (although one could still make that change), because the
statement is about the Table 1 namespace prefixes and not about where ":"
can occur.

 - Dennis 

-----Original Message-----
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200806/msg00069.html
From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com
Sent: Monday, June 30, 2008 10:03
To: office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org
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:
[ ... ]
> > "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


-- 
This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the
OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC.

In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and
to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required
before posting.

Subscribe: office-comment-subscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
Unsubscribe: office-comment-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
List help: office-comment-help@lists.oasis-open.org
List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/
Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf
List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php
Committee: 
http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office