Re: [office-comment] ODF 1.2 Part 3 - Alternative IRI identifiers Conformance Inconsistency

Hello Dennis,  It is good to hear
from you again.  Hope things are going well.

I've entered your issue into JIRA.  You
can track its progression/resolution here:

https://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3858

Regards,

-Rob

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
wrote on 05/25/2014 08:52:22 PM:

> From: "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>

> To: "'ODF Comments List'" <>

> Date: 05/25/2014 08:58 PM

> Subject: [office-comment] ODF 1.2 Part 3 - Alternative
IRI 

> identifiers Conformance Inconsistency

> 

> This comment applies to ODF 1.2 Part 3,

> 

> Sections 2.2.1(E)/2.2.2(G) on the difference between conformant 

> documents and extended conformant documents

> 

> Section 4.8.1 manifest:algorithm-name 4th list item,

> Section 4.8.3, manifest:checksum-type, last list item,

> Section 4.8.6, manifest:start-key-generation-name, last list item,

> Section 4.8.9, manifest:key-derivation-name, last list item.

> 

> THE INCONSISTENCY

> 

> In Section 2.2.1(E)/2.2.2(G), the only difference identified for 

> extended conformant documents is the presence of additional META-

> INF/ components other than the manifest and digital-signature files.

> 

> In the section 4.8 definitions referenced above, the IRI values of

> the four attributes are defined to include alternative algorithm 

> identifications.  There is an explicit statement that those 

> alternative identifications are only permitted in extended 

> conformant packages.

> 

> Furthermore, there is no indication whether the alternative 

> identifications, if present, are implementation-defined or not.

> 

> 

> SUGGESTIONS

> 

> Modify Section 2.2.2(E) to read

> 

>    E) It shall not contain other files whose relative path
begins 

> with "META-INF" other than those listed in B) and D), nor
shall the 

> META-INF/manifest.xml contain any implementation-defined IRIs as 

> alternative identifications. 

> 

> In the lists sections 4.8.1, 4.8.3, 4.8.6, and 4.8.9, change "The

> IRI of an alternative ..." to "The implementation-defined
IRI of an 

> alternative ... ."

> 

> In section 1.2 of Part 3, on Terminology, add the paragraph (from

> exact wording in Part 1),

> 

> "Implementation-defined is used in this standard for values or

> processing that may differ between ODF implementations, but is 

> required to be specified by the implementor for each particular ODF

> implementation."

> 

> 

>  -- Dennis E. Hamilton

>         +1-206-779-9430

>     https://keybase.io/orcmid
 PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A

> 

> 

> 

> 

> -- 

> This publicly archived list offers a means to provide input to the

> OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument)
TC.

> 

> In order to verify user consent to the Feedback License terms and

> to minimize spam in the list archive, subscription is required

> before posting.

> 

> Subscribe: 

> Unsubscribe: 

> List help: 

> List archive: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/

> Feedback License: http://www.oasis-open.org/who/ipr/feedback_license.pdf

> List Guidelines: http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php

> Committee: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office

> Join OASIS: http://www.oasis-open.org/join/

>