OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

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

Subject: RE: [office] Text for 17.5?

Actually, I *was* stunned into silence.  Mostly it was because I had
mis-read Michael's proposal for the paragraph that describes the base-IRI

IMPORTANT NOTE: The OASIS Standard for ODF 1.0 refers to a different RFC and
uses URI, not IRI.  The IRI language and RFC3986/RFC3987 are only used in IS
26300 (and ODF 1.0ed2-cs1).  So we need to word the erratum appropriately to
do the right thing in the respective documents.  I also think there are some
edge cases around character-set encodings in Zip files versus in the XML
versus in file systems, along with the presumption that IRIs are in an
encoding of Unicode (but may have URL %-escaping).  We need to look at
tightening that for 1.2, perhaps.  



Make no changes to the text of the paragraph beginning "A relative-path
reference ..."


Boil the second paragraph, beginning "Every IRI reference" down to this

IRI that are not relative-path references must not reference files inside a
package. Relative-path references that lead beyond the package at any point
along the path must not reference files inside any package.

OBSERVATION 1.  The "special processing" observation goes too far in
considering how implementations work.  I believe that the above makes it
clear enough that only the processor that has the package open can provide
the within-package navigation, but once a reference leads beyond a package,
by whatever means, processing can be delegated to the host system using the
(suitably-adjusted) IRI/URI.    

OBSERVATION 2.  I would love to see 17.5 cleaned up better than this, but
that involves addressing the portion that begins "The following restrictions
exist ..." and I think that takes us too far from the problem at hand.

 - Dennis


-----Original Message-----
From: Patrick Durusau [mailto:patrick@durusau.net] 
Sent: Thursday, September 25, 2008 01:53
To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [office] Text for 17.5?


After Michael's last post on this issue I don't know if we were all 
stunned into silence or if there is general agreement so I thought I 
would ask.

The text as I now understand the proposal (subject to correction) is:

A relative-path reference (as defined in ?4.2 of [RFC3986], except
that it may contain the additional characters that are allowed in IRI
references [RFC3987]) that occurs in a file that is contained in a
package has to be resolved exactly as it would be resolved if the whole
package gets unzipped into a directory at its current location. The base
IRI for resolving relative-path references is the one that has to be
used to retrieve the (unzipped) file that contains the relative-path

Every IRI reference that is not a relative-path reference does not need
any special processing. Absolute-paths can not reference files inside a
package. IRI references inside a package may address anything
addressable by an IRI that is outside of a package or within the same 
but no IRI outside of a package may address any location within any 

[ ... ]

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