The phrase "tag type" is undefined.
Do not use "tag type".
All parts such as Page 18 of Part 1
ed
Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment JP-0017 (Modified: 2008-01-04) Agreed; the phrase “tag type” is inappropriate for use in the DIS. The instances of this term in Part 1, §9.2, page 18, lines 310 will be updated as follows: For an explicit relationship, a resource is referenced from a source part’s XML using the Id attribute of a Relationship tag. [Example: A document part can have a relationship to a hyperlink only if that hyperlink's Relationship element's Id attribute value is referenced explicitly by the document part's XML. end example] [Note: Because this mechanism is used generically across multiple tag types XML elements , explicit relationships can be extracted from an Office Open XML document without prior knowledge of tag semantics. end note]. Certain relationships shall be explicit.. All other relationships are implicit [Note: The syntax for specifying an implicit relationship varies among tag types based on the content model of the XML element which is the source of the relationship . end note]. Relationships that are required or permitted, and restrictions on those relationships are described in §1015 of this Part. All other instances reviewed in Part 4 involved a compound word (e.g. “smart tag type”). Those instances are appropriate.
