ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34N0738
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34
Information Technology --
Document Description and Processing Languages
|TITLE:||Summary of Voting on JTC 1/SC 34 N 709 - Text for CD Ballot - ISO/IEC CD 19757-9 - Document Schema Definition Language (DSDL) Part 9 - Namespace- and datatype-aware DTDs|
|PROJECT:||CD 19757-9: Information technology - Document Schema Definition Languages (DSDL) - Part 9: Datatype- and namespace-aware DTDs|
|PROJECT EDITOR:||Mr. Francis Cave|
|STATUS:||Summary of voting|
|ACTION:||Based on the ballot responses, this CD is APPROVED and the project status changes to 30.60. Project Editors are requested to review comments and advise the Secretariat regarding (1) the change to status 30.92 or 30.99, and (2) the next project status and anticipated date that project status will change.|
|DISTRIBUTION:||SC34 and Liaisons|
|REFER TO:||N0709b - 2006-02-26 - Ballot due 2006-05-26 - ISO/IEC CD 19757-9 - Document Schema Definition Language (DSDL) Part 9 - Namespace-
and datatype-aware DTDs
N0709 - 2006-02-26 - Text for CD Ballot - ISO/IEC CD 19757-9 - Document Schema Definition Language (DSDL) Part 9 - Namespace- and datatype-aware DTDs
Dr. James David Mason
(ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 Secretariat - Standards Council of Canada)
Crane Softwrights Ltd.
Kars, ON K0A-2E0 CANADA
Telephone: +1 613 489-0999
Facsimile: +1 613 489-0995
Network: [email protected]
|P-Member||APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT AS PRESENTED||APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT WITH COMMENTS AS GIVEN ON THE ATTACHED||DISAPPROVAL OF THE DRAFT FOR REASONS ON THE ATTACHED||DISAPPROVAL (appropriate changes in the text will change vote to APPROVAL)||ABSTENTION (For Reasons Below)||NO RESPONSE|
|Korea, Republic of||X|
Suppose that an instance and a DTD use different namespace prefixes but they are associated with the same namespace name. Then, is the document valid? If this is the case, how can Part9-aware DTD validators can interwork with Part9-unaware DTD validators? If this is not the case, how can Part 9 interwork with recent XML specifications?
Use IRIs rather than URIs.
1. General comments
1.1 There is currently no explanation of where within an instance or DTD the namespace or datatype declarations are to be placed. A full explanation is needed of how to include declarations in a DTD or instance, whether in PI syntax or XML syntax. In particular, a mechanism is needed to invoke (from within the DTD) declarations expressed using the XML syntax.
1.2 Although alternative ways of implementing this Part of DSDL may be found, it would encourage implementation if a reference implementation were available. The design of such a reference implementation should be included in an informative annex to this standard.
1.3 An informative Annex should be added containing examples of the use of this language in both PI and XML syntax. The examples should be representative of the full scope of the application of namespaces and datatypes. In the case of namespaces, examples should include:
- unqualified names in the instance being bound to a default namespace and validated against unqualified names in the DTD
- unqualified names in the instance being bound to a default namespace and validated against qualified names in the DTD
- qualified names in the instance being bound to a namespace and validated against unqualified names in the DTD
- qualified names in the instance being bound to a namespace and validated against qualified names in the DTD (the qualifying prefixes in the instance may or may not be the same as the qualifying prefixes in the DTD)
2. Specific comments
2.1 Text is needed for Section 3 'Terms and definitions'.
2.2 Examples should not be included in Sections 4 through 7, but in an informative Annex see comment 1.3 above.