DR 09-0063: Help with buffer "lengths"

[Innovimax SARL]

Shawn,

My understanding is the opposite. It looks like JISC was afraid that the
length were in octet

So the way to solve this is to make the word "character" points to a
definition of "unicode character" in Terms and Definitions

Regards,

Mohamed

On Wed, Jun 10, 2009 at 5:22 AM, Shawn Villaron <shawnv at microsoft.com>wrote:

> Greetings,
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> The following defect reports relate to the lengths of buffers for some of
> our entities:
>
>
>
> DR 09-0063 — WML, Fields: Form Field Properties length
>
>                 Part 1, §17.16.17, “ffData (Form Field Properties)”, p.
> 1412
>
> DR 09-0064 — WML, Simple Types: ST_FFHelpTextVal length
>
>                 Part 1, §17.18.25, “ST_FFHelpTextVal”, p. 1534
>
> DR 09-0065 — WML, Simple Types: ST_FFName length
>
>                 Part 1, §17.18.26, ST_FFName, p. 1535
>
> DR 09-0066 — WML, Simple Types: ST_MacroName length
>
>                 Part 1, §17.18.51, “ST_MacroName”, p. 1563
>
> DR 09-0068 — SML, Styles: name attribute length
>
>                 Part 1, §18.8.29, “name (Font Name)”, p. 1965
>
> DR 09-0069 — SML, Pivot Tables: longText attribute length
>
>                 Part 1, §18.10.1.90, “sharedItems (Shared Items)”, p. 2164
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> Since XML specifies a character encoding, shouldn’t *characters* 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.
>
>
>
> 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.
>
>
>
> As you can imagine, I’m super interested in getting proposals to all of
> these out ASAP.  Any help here would be greatly appreciated.
>
>
>
> Thanks!
>
>
>
> shawn
>
>
>



-- 
Innovimax SARL
Consulting, Training & XML Development
9, impasse des Orteaux
75020 Paris
Tel : +33 9 52 475787
Fax : +33 1 4356 1746
http://www.innovimax.fr
RCS Paris 488.018.631
SARL au capital de 10.000 €
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20090610/6407de4a/attachment.htm>