DR 09-0168 — OPC: No mechanism to distinguish ECMA-376:2006 from IS 29500

Chris Rae Chris.Rae at microsoft.com
Thu Nov 11 00:25:06 CET 2010


In my notes I've written that in Tokyo we decided I'd look into whether we could alter Part 4 to disbar non-ASCII part names, thereby making it homogenous with ECMA-376 and removing the requirement for Transitional IS 29500 to be differentiated from ECMA-376.

I've had a look into this, and I don't think it's a very simple task. In the attached document I've added a whole new "Packaging" section to Part 4 and in there covered a modification to the Part Name grammar and prose to restrict part names to those allowable in ECMA-376. What this does *not* do is restrict the various other aspects of part naming (mainly references to parts). I think this will work okay - it'll mean that Transitional document part names references are prescribed by a grammar which permits part names that can't exist in the files. However, ultimately any reference must resolve to a valid part name and so these can be dealt with in the same way as any other invalid part name references. I'd rather not delve into a wholesale retrofitting of ECMA-376 part naming methodology into Part 4 of IS 29500.

Thoughts on this approach?

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: DR 09-0168 proposed changes.docx
Type: application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.wordprocessingml.document
Size: 55630 bytes
Desc: DR 09-0168 proposed changes.docx
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20101110/679cb8a9/attachment-0001.bin>

More information about the sc34wg4 mailing list