Re: [office-metadata] Re: preserving metadata (was deadlines?)

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Bruce,

Bruce D'Arcus wrote:

> it's seems my membership change is delayed a bit ...
>
> On May 16, 2007, at 5:42 AM, marbux wrote:
>
>> On 5/13/07, Bruce D'Arcus <bruce.darcus@opendocument.us> wrote:
>>
>>> I'm not clear what you're objecting to. Is it this sentence?
>>>
>>> "The attribute xml:id may occur on the following OpenDocument 
>>> elements:"
>>>
>>> Would it be resolved by adding an additional phrase?
>>>
>>> "Xml:id attributes shall be preserved, unless their containing element
>>> is removed." or some such?
>>>
>>
>> Sorry for the delay getting back to you. It is that sentence that I am
>> focusing on. Your suggestion would cure part of the problem, although
>> I'll propose a different solution for that aspect.
>>
>> But I'm also not clear on the intent of the sentence because the word
>> "may" is ambiguous in context. E.g., if the intent is to say that the
>> Xml:id attribute can *only* be used with the listed elements, that
>> isn't what "may" means in context. With that intent, we might better
>> say, "The attribute xml:id may occur **only** on the following
>> OpenDocument elements."
>
>
> It's to say that on those elements that xml:id is allowed on, use of 
> xml:id is optional. Otherwise, every single element (in the list of 
> allowed elements) would require an xml:id.
>
+1

>> On the other hand, if the intent is that implementation of the Xml:id
>> attribute is truly optional, then we're into the issue of preservation
>> of the attributes because ODF lacks any definition for "may."
>
>
> No, that's not the intent. If there's an xml:id attribute, it MUST be 
> preserved.
>
+1

Perhaps our language is unclear. Two separate issues: Elements a...n may 
have an xml:id. If any element a...n has an xml:id, it must be preserved.

Actually "may" is defined in 1.2 Notation.

> ...
>
>> For that reason, my suggested resolution on the preservation of the
>> XML:id attributes is to recommend to the TC that it amend the
>> conformance section to require: [i] that implementing applications
>> must produce XML that is conformant with the XML 1.0 ISO standard;
>> [ii] expressly make the definitions provided by RFC 2119 (incorporated
>> by XML 1.0) applicable throughout the specification; and [iii] place
>> an informative note where appropriate in the Metadata section and
>> elsewhere reminding that the definition of "may" in RFC 2119 requires
>> that implementing applications must be prepared to interoperate,
>> whether they support particular features or not, then note the
>> importance of element, attribute, and metadata preservation to that
>> requirement.
>
>
> This is beyond our (SC) scope then.
>
Yes.

> ...
>
>>> The statement about preserving RDF/XML files is as follows:
>>>
>>> "An OpenDocument package may contain an arbitrary number of metadata
>>> files. The content of the metadata files shall conform to the [RDF-XML]
>>> specification. Applications that read and write documents should
>>> preserve all metadata files. Metadata files should not be modified
>>> unless the content of the metadata file is changed."
>>>
>>> Suggest how you would change it and we can talk about it.
>>>
>>
>> How about changing "Metadata files *should* not be modified unless" to
>> "Metadata files *must* not be modified unless"? Is there any valid
>> reason to modify metadata files other than to change the content?
>
>
> That language is indeed a bit bizarre (the final sentence is circular, 
> isn't it?).
>
I think I know what Svante intends but I am not sure the proposed 
language accomplishes that end.

Does preserve mean that if I modify a metadata file that I have to 
preserve the original as well? I rather doubt that but it turns on the 
definition of "preserve," and that is a term we have never defined.

How about:

"Applications that do not read or write to one or more metadata files 
must preserve those files. Metadata files that are written to by some 
application must be saved as specified by that application."

Does that capture what we want to say?

Hope everyone is having a great day!

Patrick

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!