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] Comments on ODF 1.0 Errata 01 Committee Draft 02


thank you very much for your comments.

On 08/20/08 04:37, MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:
> Dear colleaguges,
> 1) Comments on the correction to 17.5
> First, "relative-path reference" in 17.5 is never defined in RFC 3987.  
> The correct term is "relative IRI reference".

First of all, the paragraph you are referring to here is not subject of 
the errata. The errata corrects the last paragraph of section 17.5 only.

The errata aims to correct those items that have been reported by the 
N0942 defect report. This defect report contains only an item for the 
last paragraph of 17.5. However, you are right that RFC 3987 uses the 
term "relative IRI" rather than "relative-path". The term relative-path 
is used within RFC 3986, which is extended by RFC 3987.

> Second, the phrase "All other kinds of IRI references, namely the ones
> that start with a schema (like http:), an authority (i.e., //) or an
> absolute-path (i.e., /)" is unecessary and slightly buggy (i.e.,
> s/schema/scheme/).  After all, they are defined in RFC 3987 as
> absolute IRI references.

This seems to be a spelling error that should be corrected before 
publication of the errata.

> Third, the last paragraph in 17.5 should be a non-normative note,
> since the behaviour of absolute IRI references is specified in RFC
> 3986 and RFC 3987.

The errata aims to reply to the items of N0942, which reported that the 
term "protocol" is used rather than "scheme" and that the 2nd half of 
the paragraph is unclear.

Turning the last paragraph additionally into a non-normative note may be 
an option for the future.

> 2) Comments on the correction to 15.31.4:
> Still, two attribute names are incorrect.  The schema has 
>   attribute chart:interval-major { double }?,
>   attribute chart:interval-minor { positiveInteger }?
> while the prose mentions the chart:axis-interval-major attribute and the
> chart:axis-interval-minor.

The references to above attributes are not subject of the errata.

However, you are right that "chart:axis-interval-major" should read 
"chart:interval-major" and "chart:axis-interval-minor" should read 

We have concentrated here on clarifying the reported mismatch between 
the attributes listed in the description and the attributes defined by 
the schema in the same section, and have added the names of the 
attributes that are actually defined by this section. However, we have 
unfortunately overseen that in addition to this the attribute names that 
were already listed are also incorrect.

So, the correction itself is correct, but there is still another error 
that is not corrected by the errata.

Best regards

> Cheers,

Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering

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