Re: Comments from the I18N Core WG on XLink 1.1

/ Felix Sasaki <> was heard to say:
| The I18N Core Wg has made comments on the Last Call WD of XLink 1.1
| [1].  You will find the comments at [2]. Congratulation to the current
| status of  the document! We are looking forward to discuss our
| comments with you

> 1 Sec. 4.3
> You describe Attribute value defaulting only in terms of XML DTDs.
> Please add a note on attribute value defaulting with XML Schema and
> with RELAX NG (in DTD compatibility mode).


> 2 Sec. 5.1.4
> About the title-type element: You mention internationalization and
> localization as a motivation to use the title-type element, and give
> the examples of bidirectional contexts or East Asian languages. This
> is very good! Could you add a pointer to examples of such elements,
> e.g. the W3C ruby specification, the dir attribute in html or language
> identification via xml:lang?


> 3 Sec. 5.4
> You reference RFC 3987 and its escaping procedure. This is very good!


> 4 Sec. 5.5
> In this section you do not refer to the escaping procedure from RFC
> 3987 which you mentioned in sec. 5.4. Is there a reason for this?

I think the intent was to allow "lazy authoring" of the xlink:href
attribute but not for the other attributes. The rationale, I presume,
was that authors sophisticated enough to be using role and arcrole,
could be relied upon to enter them correctly.

> 5 Sec. 5.6.1
> Your reference to the superseded version of XPointer, and not to the
> XPointer Framework. Is there a reason for this?

Editorial oversight :-)

> 6 Appendix A.1
> Editorial: In the reference to IETF I-D XMT, you provide the name of
> the editors, in other IETF references you don't.

Odd. That's just a straight copy from XLink 1.0. I'll fix it.

> 7 Appendix A.1
> Editorial: Please refer to the Unicode standard as described in
> Character Model for the World Wide Web, i.e. with a generic reference
> to the Unicode standard: The Unicode Consortium, The Unicode Standard,
> Version 4.1, ISBN 0-321-18578-1, as updated from time to time by the
> publication of new versions. (See
> for the latest
> version and additional information on versions of the standard and of
> the Unicode Character Database).


> 8 Appendix A.2
> Editorial: There is an entry for XLinkToRDF in the bibliography. It is
> not used in the main text.

Hmm. That's true of 1.0 too.

> 9 Appendix C and in general
> In the appendix, you provide an XML DTD, an XML Schema and an RELAX NG
> schema for XLink 1.1. Nevertheless, the examples in the main text make
> use only of XML DTDs. It would be good if you (a) would provide
> examples for RELAX NG and XML Schema in the text as well, or (b) if
> that is too much effort, than at least provide an example for each
> schema language in Appendix C. Especially for the use case of
> Internationalization and Localization for the title-type element (sec.
> 5.1.4), this would be very helpful. An example does not need to, but
> could look like this:

Thanks. You're not the first commenter to ask for more examples and we
will provide some.

> 10 Appendix C
> The hrefTypein the XML Schema and the href.att pattern in the RELAX NG
> schema are defined in terms of xs:anyURI. Please add a note that
> anyURI in its current version does not support the escaping rules of
> RFC 3987.

Hmm. I thought that was addressed in the XML Schema definition of xs:anyURI.

                                        Be seeing you,

Norman.Walsh@Sun.COM / XML Standards Architect / Sun Microsystems, Inc.
NOTICE: This email message is for the sole use of the intended
recipient(s) and may contain confidential and privileged information.
Any unauthorized review, use, disclosure or distribution is prohibited.
If you are not the intended recipient, please contact the sender by
reply email and destroy all copies of the original message.

Received on Tuesday, 11 October 2005 20:04:39 UTC