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: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OFFICE-2404), mandatory or not ?

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-2404?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=18096#action_18096 ] 

Dennis Hamilton commented on OFFICE-2404:

The preceding comment suggests, for ODF 1.2 Part 3, Section 2.6: "The "manifest.xml" file may list other files which are contained in the package and that contain RDF metadata, like files that contain RDFa metadata. The "manifest.xml" need not exist if a package does not contain any file that contain RDF metadata. "

First, I think both occurrences of "manifest.xml" should be "manifest.rdf", since *manifest.xml* already shall have a <manifest:file-entry> for every file in that package that is not specifically for the package structure itself (i.e., the "META-INF/manifest.xml" and the "mimetype" package files, for two).

Secondly, I am not sure from this that there is any condition of ODF 1.2 Part 3 such that  a manifest.rdf *shall* (or even *should*) be present for a document (each subdocument is described as permitted to have its own).  The text above seems to result in manifest.rdf being totally optional and we still don't know from Part 3 or Part 1 what it is expected to contain for a generic package or for an ODF 1.2 Part 1-specific package and, either way, how to produce one that satisfies that expectation (or not).

I would like to know very much what it is that is *essential* about a manifest.rdf that has it be different and valuable apart from any package file of a document that happens to be RDF/XML and has an <rdf:rdf> root element (assuming even that much is essential about manifest.rdf).  Also, what if the ODF 1.2 Package is used to carry many RDF package files that are essential parts of the (non-ODF 1.2) document format being packaged.  Is such an RDF-based document format obligated to use manifest.rdf because some (perhaps all) of its component package files are RDF?

> manifest.rdf, mandatory or not ?
> ----------------------------------------
>                 Key: OFFICE-2404
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-2404
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Metadata
>    Affects Versions: ODF 1.2 Part 3 CD 1, ODF 1.2 Part 1 CD 4 
>            Reporter: Bart Hanssens
>            Assignee: Michael Brauer
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: ODF 1.2 Part 3 CD 2
> says
> "The OpenDocument document contains a metadata manifest,"
> Reading part 3, section 2.6 Metadata
> "A document or sub document that is stored in a package may contain an arbitrary number of metadata files....
> All metadata files of a document or sub document shall be listed in a separate metadata manifest file, which has the file name "manifest.rdf""
> So it seems that it is absolutely required to have a metadata.rdf manifest file, even if there are no RDF metadata files at all ? Is that correct ?

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


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