W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org > November 1996

RE: FPIs

From: Ken Holman <gkholman@microstar.com>
Date: Fri, 29 Nov 1996 11:06:59 -0500
Message-ID: <c=US%a=_%p=Microstar_Softwa%l=OTTA02-961129160659Z-2601@otta02.microstar.com>
To: "'eduardo.gutentag@eng.sun.com'" <eduardo.gutentag@eng.sun.com>
Cc: "'w3c-sgml'" <w3c-sgml-wg@w3.org>
[Eduardo Gutentag]
>
>In what way does "-//SUN::SUNSOFT" deviate from the standard? 

It doesn't at all, and in fact, it shows consistent usage of owner-name
components and proper use in SGML.

>I would think
>that a deviation from the standard would be to use "+//SUN::SUNSOFT".
>
>But let me put this another way. We really want to be able to start our
>FPIs with "+//SUN::SUNSOFT".  How do we accomplish this? What authority
>is there today to register this?  "Real soon now" doesn't quite cut
>it.

The "real soon now" that I mentioned isn't in the context of being able
to register arbitrary strings ... it is in the context of ISO/IEC having
an authorized Registrar "real soon now".  According to ISO/IEC
9070:1991, the Registration Authority assigns numbers that are used in
the specific format of my example: "+//ISO/IEC 9070/RA::A00004",
specifically, the "A00004" string for Microstar.  ISO has already
assigned ANSI as the Registration Authority.  ANSI is in negotiation (it
may have even been completed by now) with GCA for GCA to be the
Registrar (this was announced at SGML'95).  The GCA Registry is at
http://www.gca.org/publicid/index.htm and outlines the process proposed
to ANSI, and the list of organisations currently assigned numbers. 
(Owners of copies of ISO/IEC 9070:1991(E) will discover some minor
discrepancies that are being addressed by ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 18/WG 8.)

So there is no _naming authority_ (9070 definition 3.9) that is "there
today to register this" to make "SUN::SUNSOFT" a _registered owner
prefix_ (9070 clause 5.2).

The note with ISO 8879:1986 Production [82] states that "+//" is used
with minimum data that "could be a citation of a national or industry
standard, or some other unique identifier assigned in accordance with
ISO 9070".  The string "+//SUN::SUNSOFT" does not qualify, but then, my
understanding is that notes are not necessarily normative.

The note with 8879 production [83] states that "-//" is used with
minimum data that "could be a (presumably unique) designation created by
a trade organisation or other user community, or by an individual".

The 9070 clause 5.3 says that unregistered owner names are prefixed
"UNREGISTERED::" (correctly used by GCA for their temporary owner names
and by James Clark in his DSSSL extensions used in James' Awesome DSSSL
Engine).

So, technically, even though "-//SUN::SUNSOFT" does not meet the precise
criteria set out by 9070, it does meet the criteria in [83]'s note in
8879 "by an individual".

So, my read is that "-//SUN::SUNSOFT" is quite acceptable for SGML use
(and Jon's point about trademark is so obvious I apologize for my
blanket statement before), but "+//SUN::SUNSOFT" is not.

....... Ken


--
G. Ken Holman            Tel:  +1 613 596-CADE(2233)    /\ /\
Chief Technology Officer Fax:  +1 613 596-5934          \/ \/   Computer
Microstar Software Ltd.  WATS:  1 800 267-9975        /\     /\ Aided
3775 Richmond Road       Mail: gkholman@microstar.com \/     \/ Document
Nepean Ontario           Info: cade@microstar.com       /\ /\  
Engineering
CANADA K2H-5B7           Web:  http://www.microstar.com \/ \/

--
G. Ken Holman            Phone:  +1 613 489-2987
P.O. Box 266             Street: 1605 Mardick Court
Kars, Ontario
CANADA  KOA-2E0          E-mail: gkholman@CanadaMail.com

-----BEGIN PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Version: 2.6

mQCNAjHOimAAAAEEAK47HbDtZZB8hJBk+r9Zh7m7QxdFHTaz/m200QQ7J9XX4QYs
h6hsuP6ZqBJXyLdmIVMEwR6Ry6oxjKMd6BRJ8OGScD89eIghgbrpMX+900NxM0x2
v3yWO9ki2gKRPrn4vlCXznnmcmsyke0G02T2LefXbgZHyVSqDSOLy8nwuN7dAAUR
tClHLiBLZW4gSG9sbWFuIDxhYjk0NUBmcmVlbmV0LmNhcmxldG9uLmNhPg==
=IN3T
-----END PGP PUBLIC KEY BLOCK-----
Received on Friday, 29 November 1996 11:08:31 EST

This archive was generated by hypermail pre-2.1.9 : Wednesday, 24 September 2003 10:03:44 EDT