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: ODF1.2 section 1.6 - MIME Types and File Name Extensions

This comment applies to the following documents:

OpenDocument-v1.2-draft7-5.odt 2008-07-18 draft, section 1.6 MIME Types and File Name Extensions
OpenDocument-v1.1-cs1.odt, section 1.7
OpenDocument-v1.0ed2-cs1.odt as ISO/IEC 26300-2006(E), section 1.7

Grammar in Paragraph 3:
phrase "according to [RFC2048] should used" should end " ... should be used".

References to [RFC2048]
The previous recommendation concerning the citation of [RFC2048] applies here:

Distinction between MIME types for packages and for single XML documents
First sentence of the section, phrase "office documents that conform to this specification and that are contained in a package" is awkward and vague.  I suggest substitution of "OpenDocument packages" for that entire phrase.

Replace the second paragraph in its entirety with:

"When an office document is represented using the single XML document form of OpenDocument, the corresponding MIME type is provided via the office:mimetype attribute of that XML document's <office:document> root element.  For the complete, single XML document itself, text/xml *should* be used in contexts where there is an associated MIME type."

[There should be suitable cross-references.  It might be important to indicate that MIME Types are also specified for the various individual parts of OpenDocument packages using the manifest.]

Normative Language
The beginning of the first sentence is normatively ambiguous:
"Appendix C contains a list of MIME types and file name extensions to be used for ... "
where "to be used" is not precise.  It is not clear whether this is a "that must be used", "that should be used", or merely "available to be used."

This is compounded by the fact that Appendix C is not normative.  [I am always baffled by this and declare myself incompetent to surmise what is intended.]  

Either way, I don't believe that IANA registers file name extensions.  The provision of file name extensions in the MIME registration information is merely informative (cf. <http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4288.txt> section 4.11). This makes the standing of the file-name-extension information particularly unclear in Appendix C.

I also note the normative language in the final [corrected] paragraph:
"Only MIME types and extensions that have been registered according to [RFC2048] *should* be used for office documents that conform to this specification. The MIME types and extensions listed in appendix C *should* be used where appropriate."

I assume "appropriate" is as the value of a package's MIME Type Stream and as the value of an office:mimetype attribute for a document of the nature indicated by the MIME type.

I also wonder how "Only MIME types and extensions that have been registered ..." extends, if it does, to other occurrences of MIME types in specified elements and attributes of OpenDocument format (i.e., in manifest:media-type attributes).

 - Dennis

Dennis E. Hamilton
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System Interoperability 
mailto:Dennis.Hamilton@acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ http://nfoWorks.org 

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