Technical problems have been pointed out in relation to not using several W3C recommendation in OOXML Draft. This relates specifically to: W3C CSS3 Color Module 2.18.46 section, p .2521)  W3C ITS 1.0 (2.3.3.24 section, p. 1051)  W3C RDF/XML Syntax section 10, p. 218)  W3C MathML 2.0 (7.1 section, p. 747)  W3C SMIL 2.1 (4.6 section, p. 3854)  W3C SVG 1.1 ( 15.2.17 section, p. 158, 2.18.46 section, p. 2521) Polish NB expresses their opinion that according to the JTC1 Directive, the ISO International Standard is required to be in compliance with existing ISO and/or IEC standards (see the Definition 3.3. of IS as taken out from ISO/IEC Directives, Part 2 Rules for the structure and drafting of International Standards). We have not recognized any incompliance of the Draft with other ISO and/or IEC standards. However, W3C recommendations and their applicability should be considered as a base for further development during routine standard maintenance process as it is usually done in JTC1.

No specific change proposed

Several specific locations (see column (5)

ge

Proposed Disposition of DIS 29500 Comment PL-0002 (Modified: 2008-01-10) We agree that the use of existing standards is an important goal within any new standard; a great deal of effort was placed behind reviewing existing standards for their applicability to Office Open XML and using them whenever necessary ­ the following standards are used by DIS 29500 and referenced in either the Normative References or the Bibliography: Character Sets from IANA. ISO/IEC 2382.1:1993, Information technology — Vocabulary — Part 1: Fundamental terms. ISO 8601:2004, Information interchange — Representation of dates and times ISO/IEC 10646:2003 (all parts), Information technology — Universal Multiple-Octet Coded Character Set (UCS). ISO/IEC 14496-22:2007, Information technology ­ Coding of audio-visual objects ­ Part 22: Open Font Format. RFC 2119, Bradner, Scott, 1997: “Key words for use in RFCs to Indicate Requirement Levels”. RFC 2045, Borenstein, N., and N. Freed. “Multipurpose Internet Mail Extensions (MIME) Part One: Format of Internet Message Bodies.” The Internet Society. 1996. RFC 2616, Berners-Lee, T., R. Fielding, H. Frystyk, J. Gettys, P. Leach, L. Masinter, and J. Mogul. “Hypertext Transfer Protocol–HTTP/1.1.” The Internet Society. 1999. RFC 3066, Alvestrand, H. “Tags for the Identification of Languages.” The Internet Society. 2001. RFC 3339, Klyne, G. and C. Newman “Date and Time on the Internet: Timestamps.” The Internet Society. 2002. RFC 3629, Yergeau, F. “UTF-8, a transformation format of ISO 10646.” The Internet Society. 2003. RFC 3986, Berners-Lee, T., R. Fielding, and L. Masinter. “Uniform Resource Identifier (URI): Generic Syntax.” The Internet Society. 2005. The Unicode Consortium. The Unicode Standard, Version 5.0, defined by: The Unicode Standard, Version 5.0 (Reading, MA, Addison-Wesley, 2006. ISBN 0-321-48091-0). W3C MathML 2.0 W3C SMIL 2.1 W3C SVG 1.1 XSLT, Clark, James, "XSL Transformations (XSLT) Version 1.0," World Wide Web Consortium Recommendation. 1999. XML, Tim Bray, Eve Maler, Jean Paoli, C. M. Sperberg-McQueen, John Cowan, and François Yergeau (editors). “Extensible Markup Language (XML) 1.1,” Third Edition. World Wide Web Consortium. XML Base, Marsh, Jonathan. “XML Base.” World Wide Web Consortium. 2001. XML Namespaces, Bray, Tim, Dave Hollander, Andrew Layman, and Richard Tobin (editors). “Namespaces in XML 1.1.” World Wide Web Consortium. 2004. XML Path Language Specification, Version 1.0, W3C Recommendation 16 November 1999 XML Schema Part 0: Primer Second Edition, W3C Recommendation 28 October 2004. XML Schema Part 1: Structures Second Edition, W3C Recommendation 28 October 2004. XML Schema Part 2: Datatypes Second Edition, W3C Recommendation 28 October 2004. .ZIP File Format Specification from PKWARE, Inc. We also agree with the assertion that future versions of the specification should carefully consider all available standards and use them whenever possible, and will be focusing on this within the maintenance process for this specification.

Tag and Go

1 Comment

  1. hAl September 22, 2007 @ 8:08 pm

    Unsolvable comment

Leave a comment

XHTML: You can use these tags: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <code> <em> <i> <strike> <strong>

  • Argentina (1)
  • Australia (30)
  • Austria (1)
  • Belgium (1)
  • Brazil (64)
  • Bulgaria (3)
  • Canada (79)
  • Chile (217)
  • China (1)
  • Colombia (237)
  • Czech Republic (75)
  • Denmark (168)
  • Ecma (76)
  • Ecuador (1)
  • Finland (15)
  • France (592)
  • Germany (162)
  • Ghana (12)
  • Greece (113)
  • India (82)
  • Iran (58)
  • Ireland (12)
  • Israel (33)
  • Italy (2)
  • Japan (82)
  • Jordan (1)
  • Kenya (81)
  • Malaysia (23)
  • Malta (5)
  • Mexico (7)
  • New Zealand (54)
  • Norway (12)
  • Peru (10)
  • Philippines (7)
  • Poland (4)
  • Portugal (118)
  • Singapore (2)
  • South Africa (17)
  • South Korea (25)
  • Spain (1)
  • Switzerland (19)
  • Thailand (1)
  • Tunisia (3)
  • Turkey (1)
  • UK (635)
  • Uruguay (18)
  • USA (288)
  • Venezuela (73)