Re: [LC Review] of WebCGM 2.0

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.
http://www.w3.org/2006/07/03/WebCGM2-LastCallResponses.html

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.

Thierry.



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
W3C

Received on Friday, 7 July 2006 14:55:59 UTC