- From: Chris Lilley <chris@w3.org>
- Date: Mon, 10 Jul 2006 18:40:41 +0200
- To: Benoit Bezaire <benoit@itedo.com>
- Cc: WebCGM WG <public-webcgm-wg@w3.org>
On Monday, July 10, 2006, 4:14:13 PM, Benoit wrote: BB> Here are my opinions with regards to these comments: BB> comment 1: yes, "OASIS CGM Open ..." should be removed from <title>. BB> comment 2: as Felix points out, we have two references to Unicode... BB> Unicode and Unicode-401. However, I couldn't find Unicode-401 anywhere BB> in the specification, the closest I could find was [Unicode40] BB> in Chapter 3 (which we don't have in the reference section). One BB> reference to Unicode should suffice, no? The generic one. I agree - especially if the references to a specific version are not actually used. C063 [S] A generic reference to the Unicode Standard MUST be made if it is desired that characters allocated after a specification is published are usable with that specification. A specific reference to the Unicode Standard MAY be included to ensure that functionality depending on a particular version is available and will not change over time. http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-RefUnicode BB> comment 3: possibly a bit more tricky... I suspect the default is BB> IsoLatin 1 for legacy reasons. What would be the harm in making the BB> default UTF-8? Is the text ever used without an explicit indication of the character encoding?In other words, does content rely on the encoding being a particular default? Its certainly easier to change the default now rather than later. Also, its off for the XML companion file to have one default encoding (UTF-8 or UTF-16) and the WebCGM to have a different one (Latin-1). BB> As for 'character encoding' instead of 'character set', BB> I suspect we kept the same wording as CGM:1999. More thoughts anyone BB> on this one? We should use the correct term, character encoding. Character set has a different meaning. A character encoding scheme, together with the coded character sets it is used with, is called a character encoding, and is identified by a unique identifier, such as an IANA charset identifier. http://www.w3.org/TR/charmod/#sec-Digital BB> -- BB> Regards, BB> Benoit mailto:benoit@itedo.com BB> BB> This is a forwarded message BB> From: Thierry MICHEL <tmichel@w3.org> BB> To: public-webcgm-wg@w3.org BB> Date: Friday, July 7, 2006, 10:55:27 AM BB> Subject: [LC Review] of WebCGM 2.0 BB> ===8<==============Original message text=============== BB> WEB CGM WG Colleagues BB> Here is our first Last Call comment on WEbCGM 2.0. BB> It is incorporated into the Disposition of comments document for WebCGM BB> 2.0 Last Call. BB> http://www.w3.org/2006/07/03/WebCGM2-LastCallResponses.html BB> Note that this Disposition of Comment is currently a Member restricted BB> document and an editor's copy. BB> I will be tracking comments as they come in. BB> Thierry. BB> 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 . -- Chris Lilley mailto:chris@w3.org Interaction Domain Leader Co-Chair, W3C SVG Working Group W3C Graphics Activity Lead Co-Chair, W3C Hypertext CG
Received on Monday, 10 July 2006 16:40:58 UTC