Re: [office-metadata] comments on latest draft

[Bruce D'Arcus <bruce.darcus@OpenDocument.us>]

On Mar 7, 2007, at 8:56 AM, Svante Schubert wrote:

>> 2. "Applications that read and write document should preserve all 
>> metadata files."
>>
>> Sorry, that's not good enough. All ODF 1.2 compliant applications 
>> "shall" preserve the files.
> In ODF features are in general marked as "may" or "should" and not as 
> "shall".

Except that I see the word "shall" at least three times on that page. 
It is a striking contrast to then say preserving the files is a 
"should."

> We can hardly make an exception for metadata, especially as we have no 
> consistency concept so far, simply keeping them won't be sufficient, 
> sometimes a removal might be even better.

Under what conditions would it be OK for an application to open a 
metadata enhanced file and remove the metadata per se? That seems a 
recipe for big problems?

>> 3.  Question: do we want to offer suggestions on RDF/XML 
>> serialization to make it friendlier to XML tools?
> Good point. We shall we bring this up on today's call if we agree in 
> giving a serialization suggestion.
> For instance, a limitation of RDF/XML attribute / element 
> changeability would be helpful.

I'd just suggest a generic suggestion, as I've mentioned before, that 
the RDF/XML be serialized using what is often called the "abbreviated" 
system: all properties wrapped in a common rdf:about wrapper, 
properties represented as elements, and so forth.

>> Section 1.1.1
>> =============
>>
>> 4. The meta:category example should use the new URI for vCard (the 
>> older one is being deprecated).
>>
>> <http://www.w3.org/2006/vcard/ns#>
> It was not a deprecated link of vCard, but a link to a vCard encoding 
> in RDF/XML.

Yes, I know. It's that old version is rather ugly, and so better to 
point instead to something more up-to-date.

...

>> 8. First sentence is unclear.
>
> As there was no suggested wording, I changed it to:
>
> "The xml:id attribute is allowed on the set of OpenDocument elements 
> described below. The attribute gives the element a unique 
> identification in the XML file and works as an anchor to create 
> references to the element."

Good.

>> Section 1.2.2
>> =============
>>
>> 10. The list item 1 is unclear.
> I will discuss this with Patrick. Have you a suggestion?

No. Sorry; busy.

>> 11. The list item 2 might include reference to the fact that the 
>> meta:label may do more than just display, but might offer other 
>> functionality?
> I am not sure if I understand, what you mean. Have you got a suggested 
> wording?

Maybe Patrick has an idea, but I'm just noting that this can 
potentially be used for more than just "creating content." Imagine if I 
have a label that refers to a vCard for example. Maybe I can 
right-click and send that person an email or schedule an appointment. 
Just saying you tweak the language so developers can see that.

Bruce