<META HTTP-EQUIV="Content-Type" CONTENT="text/html; charset=utf-8">
<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:Tahoma;
panose-1:2 11 6 4 3 5 4 4 2 4;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-margin-top-alt:auto;
margin-right:0in;
mso-margin-bottom-alt:auto;
margin-left:0in;
font-size:12.0pt;
font-family:"Times New Roman","serif";}
span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";
color:#1F497D;}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page Section1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.Section1
{page:Section1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=Section1><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>Interesting; that makes me wonder if our resolution to DR-09-0070 is incorrect …<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>But, this does seem to make more sense from an XML perspective, so unless someone disagrees, I think we should go with using “unicode characters” as the metric.<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’d prefer to take the DRs listed below, add DR-09-0070 to the list, and update their prose so that it clearly states Unicode characters. I looked at changing the Terms and Definitions ( adding a definition for character, but with 2600+ instances of character, we could introduce more problems ).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'>I’ll get these proposals out based on the above information shortly ( next couple of hours ).<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><span style='font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";color:#1F497D'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'>From:</span></b><span style='font-size:10.0pt;font-family:"Tahoma","sans-serif"'> Innovimax SARL [mailto:innovimax@gmail.com] <br><b>Sent:</b> Wednesday, June 10, 2009 12:12 AM<br><b>To:</b> Shawn Villaron<br><b>Cc:</b> SC 34 WG4<br><b>Subject:</b> Re: DR 09-0063: Help with buffer "lengths"<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoNormal><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoNormal style='margin-bottom:12.0pt'>Shawn,<br><br>My understanding is the opposite. It looks like JISC was afraid that the length were in octet<br><br>So the way to solve this is to make the word "character" points to a definition of "unicode character" in Terms and Definitions<br><br>Regards,<br><br>Mohamed<o:p></o:p></p><div><p class=MsoNormal>On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Shawn Villaron <<a href="mailto:shawnv@microsoft.com">shawnv@microsoft.com</a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><div><div><p>Greetings,<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>I’m hoping that one of the XML experts on WG4 can help me determine the right approach for handling a set of open defect reports.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>The following defect reports relate to the lengths of buffers for some of our entities:<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0063 — WML, Fields: Form Field Properties length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §17.16.17, “ffData (Form Field Properties)”, p. 1412<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0064 — WML, Simple Types: ST_FFHelpTextVal length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §17.18.25, “ST_FFHelpTextVal”, p. 1534<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0065 — WML, Simple Types: ST_FFName length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §17.18.26, ST_FFName, p. 1535<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0066 — WML, Simple Types: ST_MacroName length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §17.18.51, “ST_MacroName”, p. 1563<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0068 — SML, Styles: name attribute length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §18.8.29, “name (Font Name)”, p. 1965<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'>DR 09-0069 — SML, Pivot Tables: longText attribute length<o:p></o:p></p><p style='margin-left:.5in'> Part 1, §18.10.1.90, “sharedItems (Shared Items)”, p. 2164<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>We’ve currently defined each of these buffers in terms of number of characters. My notes say that there is WG4 interest in understanding the lengths of these in octets. But that’s where I’m getting confused.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Since XML specifies a character encoding, shouldn’t <b>characters</b> be the right unit of measurement here? I’ve verified that the buffers defined are correct, so if we’re just waiting for verification, we can write this up and close them out; if we need to use a different unit of measurement, if you can help me figure out what the right unit of measurement is, I can get them written up tomorrow.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>To be clear, I don’t have a strong opinion here; rather, I’d prefer to tap into the XML expertise on WG4 to inform me on the best approach.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>As you can imagine, I’m super interested in getting proposals to all of these out ASAP. Any help here would be greatly appreciated.<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p>Thanks!<o:p></o:p></p><p> <o:p></o:p></p><p><span style='color:#888888'>shawn<o:p></o:p></span></p><p><span style='color:#888888'> <o:p></o:p></span></p></div></div></div><p class=MsoNormal><br><br clear=all><br>-- <br>Innovimax SARL<br>Consulting, Training & XML Development<br>9, impasse des Orteaux<br>75020 Paris<br>Tel : +33 9 52 475787<br>Fax : +33 1 4356 1746<br><a href="http://www.innovimax.fr">http://www.innovimax.fr</a><br>RCS Paris 488.018.631<br>SARL au capital de 10.000 €<o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>