Then it would look something like this (below or attached)
Quoting :
> Thanks Alex
>
> Apologies that I didn't quite realise the purpose of the documents
> as being to consider the format rather than the content.
>
> Yes the format does appear to be along the correct lines, although
> there would probably need to be additions such as, at the least -
>
> OASIS logo
> Title - such as 'Document Operation Language (UOML) 1.0'
>
> Publication Date
> Document identifier - could be same as the filename if it obeys the
> OASIS rules
> Editorial Status - 'Draft'
> Location (perhaps include this later when one is established)
> Editors
> Contributors
>
> <rest of document as in the samples sent on the 14th Feb>
>
> Normative References (if there are any, perhaps ODF, W3C XML Schema, XML )
> Non-Normative References (if there are any - perhaps ODF would be here)
> Notices (OASIS copyright)
>
> I am also reminded that it would seem to be ideal if there
> were no spaces in the filename but if there are spaces then
> no double spaces. Maybe an file name without spaces like
> 'wd-UOML-0-1.odt' might be ideal, or 'wd-UOML-1.0.odt' but
> I think it best to avoid '.' except for extensions.
>
> I hope these comments are more relevant. The document samples
> have a good structure as OASIS specification drafts, I think.
>
> All the best
>
> Stephen Green
>
>
>
>
>
> Quoting Wang Donglin <>:
>
>> Thanks Green.
>> Xu Guo has given the .odt file format for the sample schedma, TOC
>> and instroduction in 14th Feb. Pine converted to PDF in 27th Feb.
>> We need your comment to these documents. After confirmation of
>> sample, we will provide the whole specification according to the
>> style of sample.
>>
>> -Alex
>>
