[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office] SC34 Ballot N1414 "New Work Item Proposal on DocumentPackaging"
"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 06/04/2010 01:36:31 PM: > > The proposal acknowledges that it is about existing technology on which > standards depend and which is in broad use, but there is no International > Standard or equivalent on which other specifications can rely. > I'd question that assertion. We "rely" on the ZIP Application Note. So does OOXML. So does EPUB. And so do, implicitly, most of our ODF implementations, who use ZIP libraries from their programming platforms that themselves are based on the ZIP Application Note. This seems to be working fine. The world has not ended the last time I looked out the window. In particular I don't see any JIRA defects related to the contents of the Application Note. > It also appears that the scope is limited to precisely a subset that works > for document packaging as commonly relied upon as a substrate for IS 26300, > IS 29500, etc. It is also proposed to deal with the case of packages that > carry XML documents as components of some sort of connected composite > structure and also standardize an use of Unicode in package information > (something not established by the Zip specification on which we and others > rely). > Again, do we have a problem here? We have our packaging specification. So does OOXML. So does EPUB. If we really wanted to attempt a harmonization here (and I'm open to this idea) I think we'd start by involving these three committees in a discussion. And if we did that and made a list of issues that would need to be resolved to achieve that harmonization, I'd bet you that standardizing ZIP would not figure in the top 20 issues that would need to be resolved. It is simply not a real world issue. I'm not saying that there are not interesting things that could be standardized here. For example, it might be nice to have a standard URL protocol for ZIP, or standard fragment schema for URL addressing of ZIP items, etc. Or any other conventions that are effectively a layer between core ZIP's compression/packaging specification and what ODF/OOXML/EPUB use. But including the core ZIP packaging/compression in the same standard is a real bad idea, IMHO. As I said before, it is like specifying Unicode and XML in the same standard. Or XML and ODF in the same standard. This leads to problems when one part of the market is beholden to a group of experts in an entirely different technology. You should match the standard to how the market treats the technology. And for 20 years the market has clearly treated ZIP packaging/compression as a standalone concern. -Rob > - Dennis > > -----Original Message----- > From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] > Sent: Friday, June 04, 2010 08:21 > To: office@lists.oasis-open.org > Subject: [office] SC34 Ballot N1414 "New Work Item Proposal on Document > Packaging" > > I'd like to draw the TC's attention to the following ballot in JTC1/SC34: > http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/open/1414.pdf > > For the record I'd like to state that although we are clearly a > stakeholder, the OASIS ODF TC was not consulted on this proposal, nor > have we discussed it as a TC, nor have we given our approval to it. > > [ ... ] > > Although as liaisons we cannot vote, the ODF TC can certainly submit > comments in response to this ballot. Let me know if anyone has strong > opinions on this proposal. If we can arrive at a position that the TC > agrees with, we can submit it. Deadline is mid-July, I think. > > Regards, > > -Rob > > ------------- > Rob Weir > Co-Chair OASIS ODF TC > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]