W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webcgm-wg@w3.org > July 2006

Fwd: Re: [LC Review] of WebCGM 2.0

From: Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>
Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 10:14:13 -0400
Message-ID: <616832189.20060710101413@itedo.com>
To: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
Here are my opinions with regards to these comments:

comment 1: yes, "OASIS CGM Open ..." should be removed from <title>.

comment 2: as Felix points out, we have two references to Unicode...
Unicode and Unicode-401. However, I couldn't find Unicode-401 anywhere
in the specification, the closest I could find was [Unicode40]
in Chapter 3 (which we don't have in the reference section). One
reference to Unicode should suffice, no? The generic one.

comment 3: possibly a bit more tricky... I suspect the default is
IsoLatin 1 for legacy reasons. What would be the harm in making the
default UTF-8? As for 'character encoding' instead of 'character set',
I suspect we kept the same wording as CGM:1999. More thoughts anyone
on this one?

 Benoit                            mailto:benoit@itedo.com

This is a forwarded message
From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org>
To: public-webcgm-wg@w3.org
Date: Friday, July 7, 2006, 10:55:27 AM
Subject: [LC Review] of WebCGM 2.0

===8<==============Original message text===============

WEB CGM WG Colleagues

Here is our first Last Call comment on WEbCGM 2.0.
It is incorporated into the Disposition of comments document for WebCGM
2.0 Last Call.

Note that this Disposition of Comment is currently a Member restricted
document and an editor's copy.

I will be tracking comments as they come in.


Felix Sasaki wrote:
> Hello,
> These are comments on
> WebCGM 2.0, http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-webcgm20-20060623/
> sent on behalf of the i18n core working group.
> Best regards, Felix Sasaki.
> Comment 1 (editorial): <title> elements in some files are confusing
> It seems that some <title> elements contain "OASIS CGM Open
> specification - ...", e.g.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-webcgm20-20060623/WebCGM20-TOC.html
> "OASIS CGM Open specification - WebCGM Profile - Expanded Table of Contents"
> This is just confusing and should be fixed.
> Comment 2 (editorial): Reference to Unicode
> In
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-webcgm20-20060623/WebCGM20-Intro.html#norm-ref
>  , you have two references to Unicode, one generic reference, and one to
> version 4.01. Is there a reason for that? If not, please reference to
> Unicode following the description at
> http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-RefUnicode , that is, only in a
> generic manner.
> Comment 3 (editorial): Why not Unicode as the default encoding?
> In
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/WD-webcgm20-20060623/WebCGM20-Concepts.html#webcgm_2_4
> , (sec. 2.5.4), you describe isolatin1 as the default "character set".
> We would propose to describe UTF-8 as the default character encoding,
> and to use the term "character encoding" instead of "character set". See
> also http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#C020 .

Thierry Michel

===8<===========End of original message text===========

attached mail follows:

Received on Monday, 10 July 2006 16:00:56 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 6 January 2015 20:23:38 UTC