Re: LCWD: Canonical EXI

http://www.w3.org/TR/2015/WD-exi-c14n-20150521/

This document doesn't explain what is normative/informative.
I'd guess that Notes and A/B/C aren't normative, but there doesn't
seem to be text to that effect.

>         C.2.2 Option 2 - Uri scheme fragment identifier

URI is usually written as such.

> On the contrary, values that match the default value (i.e. <blockSize>1000000</blockSize>) MUST be omitted.

On the contrary => conversely

> When the alignment option compression is set, pre-compress MUST be used instead.

instead of ?

> Moreover, the EXI event sequence of each nested element MUST be SE followed by EE

would it hurt you to link "SE" and "EE" to some definition of "Start
Element" / "End Element" for readers less familiar w/ the jargon used
herein?

> The user defined meta-data MUST NOT be used unless it conveys a convention used by the application.

"user defined meta-data" is italicized, but it isn't linked, and the
use of "The" doesn't help me. If you dropped "The", I could almost
understand what you're saying. If the "The" is important, then this
italicized text SHOULD link to something defining it.

> The user defined meta-data conveys auxiliary information and does not alter or extend the EXI data format.
> Hence it deemed acceptable to omit this information.

it => it is | it was

> Elements that are necessary to structure the EXI options document according to the XML schema
> (i.e. lesscommon, uncommon, alignment, datatypeRepresentationMap, preserve and common)
> MUST be omitted unless there is at least one nested element according to the previous steps.

Ideally steps are in numbered form, or somehow called out beyond "by
the way, I hid steps somewhere before this point".

> For Start Element events the order is as follows:
> SE( qname )
> SE ( uri : * )
> SE ( * )
> For Attribute events the order is as follows:
> AT( qname )
> AT ( uri : * )
> AT ( * )

Is there a reason that there's no space before the `(` for qname, but
there is a space for the other two `(`s?

> Optimizations such as pruning insignificant xsi:type values (e.g., xsi:type="xsd:string" for string values)
> or insignificant xsi:nil values (e.g., xsi:nil="false")
> is prohibited for a Canonical EXI processor.

I think:
is => are

> where the rules of determining equivalence is described below.
is => are (?)

> Further, a String value MUST be represented as string value hit if possible.

`hit` is used three times, only locally. It should either be defined
or linked to something.

> The canonical representation dictates that characters from the restricted character set MUST use
> the according n-bit Unsigned Integer.

"according n-bit Unsigned Integer" sounds weird. If it's defined
elsewhere, please link. If not, please explain. (Or "according" could
be the wrong word.)

> A rationale for each decision is given as well as background information is provided.

as well as => and

> EXI can be used in such use cases and offers benefits w.r.t. compact data exchange and fast processing.

> To ensure that relevant Infoset items are available the following
> EXI Fidelity Options must be always enabled:
> Preserve.pis, Preserve.prefixes, and Preserve.lexicalValues.
> When the XML canonicalization algorithm preserves comments
> the EXI fidelity option Preserve.comments must be also enabled.

//This almost feels like normative instruction, and I don't recall
similar instructions in the main document.
//If similar instructions do exist in the main document, a pointer
would be appreciated.

I've decided the following is the block could benefit from emendation:

> Canonical XML is designed to be useful to applications that test whether an XML document has been changed (e.g., XML signature).

I read the "is" here as indicating it was something defined in this
document. I think this text is actually referring to something beyond
this document, in which case, I'd suggest:

 is => was

Alternatively you could prefix the sentence with "While" or something
(but that would involve rewriting the end of the sentence)....

> Canonical EXI, in contrast to Canonical XML, deals with EXI documents and does not use plain-text XML data and the associated overhead.

the => its

> Example B-3. Example algorithm for converting float values to the canonical form

Example..Example?

> Initialize the exponent with the value 0 (zero) and jump to step 2.

s/. and j/. J/

> If the value after the decimal point can be represented as 0 (zero)
> without losing precision jump to step 4, otherwise to step 3.

s/precision jump/precision, [then] jump/
s/otherwise/otherwise jump/

> If the signed mantissa is unequal 0 (zero), unequal -0 (negative zero), and contains a trailing
> zero jump to 6, otherwise to step 7.

s/zero jump/zero, [then] jump/
s/otherwise/otherwise jump/

> The canonicalization process of EXI

> bases upon

awkward

> the knowledge of the used EXI options which is an optional part of the EXI header.
> These options communicate the various EXI options that have been used to encode the actual XML information with EXI and
> are crucial to be known.

awkward

> This sections

section => section | This => These

> provides some best practices - so that for example it can be successfully used as part of the digital signature framework or in other use-cases.
> Currently different options are discussed.

"discussed" or "under discussion" or ??

i.e. awkward

Received on Monday, 1 June 2015 19:25:52 UTC