- From: Jon Ferraiolo <jferrai@us.ibm.com>
- Date: Fri, 5 Oct 2007 09:02:02 -0700
- To: "Marcos Caceres" <marcosscaceres@gmail.com>
- Cc: "public-appformats@w3.org" <public-appformats@w3.org>
- Message-ID: <OFF2A7BA4E.36866C9F-ON8825736B.004FBD73-8825736B.005813CD@us.ibm.com>
Hi Marcos, Overall, I think this is a good direction. It sets the bar about as low as possible for both consumers and producers, allows the use of existing tools (Windows built-in ZIP tools, WinZip, etc.), with while still defining what it means to be interoperable, allows OOXML to embed all of the Windows-specific extension fields, and the specification is short and understandable. The ideal approach from a standards perspective would be to separate out the ZIP writeup into a separate standalone spec (i.e., don't reference the OCF spec, just "repurpose" its technical approaches) so that it can be reused by other initiatives (W3C or otherwise). When I was involved in the OCF spec, the IDPF folks were amenable to updating their eBook specs to point to an official standard packaging standard from other standards bodies, where W3C and OASIS were the presumed likely choices, and W3C was the top preference. Maybe the next version of ODF would reference such a W3C standard. I am pretty sure they would conclude it's the right thing to do. I haven't had time to think through the UTF-8 issues. A minor red flag is raised when I see the word "MAY". Are you saying it is OK to use platform-native encodings, Shift-JIS encoding or (showing my age) EBCDIC encodings? Maybe there is an encoding field in the ZIP spec. (If I ever knew about this field, I have forgotten it by now.) Remember, the goal of standards are to promote interoperability, and if file name encodings are a free-for-all, then interoperability might suffer. Regarding the issue of proprietary extensions, how about just staying silent on the issue? Basically, the above OCF-like approach is a whitelisting approach which identifies the fields that producers and consumers must support. Other fields, whether define in the ZIP spec or extensions defined by vendors, can be ignored by the consumer. For example, there isn't a problem with MS (for example) extending ZIP to make the format do special magic on Windows so long as the resulting ZIP file will still open with non-MS software (e.g., WinZip) and continue to work on Mac and Linux systems. Jon "Marcos Caceres" <marcosscaceres@g mail.com> To Sent by: "public-appformats@w3.org" public-appformats <public-appformats@w3.org> -request@w3.org cc Jon Ferraiolo/Menlo Park/IBM@IBMUS Subject 10/05/2007 12:04 Re: [WIDGETS] Zip Support (request AM for comments) Ok, here is some draft text if we were to go down the OCF route for Zip. The only bit I would change is to relax and clarify the UTF-8 conformance requirement in OCF. I've also now allowed Zip64. =Zip files= For the purposes of this specification, A valid Zip file is a data object that conforms to the production of a Zip Container as defined in Section 4 of the [OCF] specification. In the event that a widget user agents encounters Zip file that is in error, the widget user agent must abort any processing of the Zip file and should inform the end-user with an appropriate localized error dialog: As with [OCF], Zip files must not be split into multiple files or span multiple volumes. Zip files that are split into multiple files or span multiple volumes are non-conforming. A widget user agent must treat Zip files that have been split into multiple files or span multiple volumes as being in error. As with [OCF], Zip files must be created using the Deflate compression algorithm as specified in the [Zip] specification. Zip files compressed with any other compression algorithm are non-conforming. A widget user agent must treat Zip files created using other compression algorithms as being in error. As with [OCF], A Zip file may be created using the ZIP64 extensions defined in [Zip]. As with [OCF], A Zip file must not be created using either the traditional PKWARE Encryption or Strong Encryption methods, or any other future encryption method, defined in the Zip File Format Specification. Widget user agents must treat encrypted Zip files as being in error. The names of files and directories within a Zip file should be encoded in US-ASCII within the valid range of characters for file and directory names (defined elsewhere). As with [OCF], the names of files and directories within a Zip file may be encoded in UTF-8 but only in conformance with Section 3.3 (File Names) of the [OCF] specification. A widget user agent must treat Zip files that don't conform to Section 3.3 of the [OCF] specification as being in error. Note: Please also refer to Appendix D - Language Encoding (EFS) in the [Zip] specification for the technical details of how to indicate that a Zip file contains UTF-8 names. Issue: Using proprietary extensions to the [Zip] specification makes a widget resource non-conforming. Kind regards, -- Marcos Caceres http://datadriven.com.au
Attachments
- image/gif attachment: graycol.gif
- image/gif attachment: pic04176.gif
- image/gif attachment: ecblank.gif
Received on Friday, 5 October 2007 16:05:12 UTC