[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Resolution for Comments #1 on ODF 1.0 Errata 01 CommitteeDraft 02
A small correction: The bibliographic entry below must read [RFC398*6*] *T. Berners-Lee,* R. Fielding, L. Masinter, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt, IETF, 2005. Michael On 08/26/08 16:03, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote: > Patrick, > > please find below the proposal that resolves comment #1 from > > http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200808/msg00052.html > > The proposed new wording for the last two paragraphs of 17.5 is: > > A relative-path reference *(as defined in ァ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 > reference. > > *Every IRI reference that is not a relative-path reference does* not > need any special processing. This especially means that absolute-paths > do not reference files inside the package, but within the hierarchy the > package is contained in, for instance the file system. IRI references > inside a package may leave the package, but once they have left the > package, they never can return into the package or another one. > > The changes are included into "*". > > For this change, we additionally must include the following entry to the > bibliographic index in appendix B: > > [RFC3987] R. Fielding, L. Masinter, Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): > Generic Syntax, http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt, IETF, 2005. > > > Best regards > > Michael > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: Re: [office-comment] Comments on ODF 1.0 Errata 01 Committee > Draft 02 > Date: Thu, 21 Aug 2008 17:06:27 +0900 > From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp> > To: office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org > References: <20080821084339.6A15.EB2M-MRT@asahi-net.or.jp> > <48AD1600.1000400@sun.com> > > >>> The phrase "All other kinds of IRI references, namely the ones that >>> start with a schema (like http:), an authority (i.e., //) or an >>> absolute-path (i.e., /) " in the draft errata means either >>> >>> 1) IRI references that start with a scheme (like http:), >>> 2) IRI references that start with an authority (i.e., //), or >>> 3) IRI references that start with an absolute-path (i.e., /) >> Yes, but it also includes any other IRI reference that is not a relative >> path. > > I now understand your point. Yes, the proposed wording does > enumerate all IRI references that are not relative-path references. > > However, please replace "All other kinds of IRI references, namely the > ones that start with a schema (like http:), an authority (i.e., //) or > an absolute-path (i.e., /) " by "Every IRI reference that > is not a relative-path reference". There is no point in > mentioning schemes, authorities, etc. here. > > It appears that "This means that absolute-paths..." in the proposed > errata is not very satisfactory, since network-path references are not > mentioned. > > >> The preceding paragraph is: >> >> "A relative-path reference (as described in ァ6.5 of [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 reference. " >> >> It does not include the term "relative reference", but only >> "relative-path reference". Therefore, the paragraph in question includes >> all kind of IRIs that are not "relative path-references". This includes >> absolute references, but also all kind of relative references that are >> not relative path-references. > > Agreed. > >> So, in my opinion the problem is not that paragraph, but the reference >> to 6.5 of RFC3987. >> >> RFC3986 and its predecessors are defining terms like "relative >> path-reference" or "network-path" references, and a "relative >> path-reference" is exactly the kind of URI/IRI that requires a special >> processing. But RFC3986 is about URIs. ODF supports IRIs as described by >> RFC3987. RFC3987 unfortunately does define these terms, and I could also >> not find any counterparts for them. >> >> Maybe we should say: >> >> "A relative-path reference (as defined in ァ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 [...]" > > This looks fine to me. > > > > Cheers, -- Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55 D-20097 Hamburg, Germany michael.brauer@sun.com http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500 http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]