Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best Practices document.

[Francis Cave]

Caroline, Murata-san

I have discussed this with Graham Bell at EDItEUR. Interestingly, he has had
similar questions about a media type for ONIX from Bill Kasdorf, regarding
the embedding of ONIX records inside EPUB files. So I think he is coming
around to the idea that there may be some value in registering one or more
media types for ONIX (there may be a need for a JSON media type as well as
an XML media type, although that probably doesn't concern us). 

On the question of a relationship type for ONIX, Graham wonders whether it
would be better to use a URI more like the namespace URI for ONIX. I know
this wouldn't have the "guaranteed" permanence of a PURL, but since this is
just an example, does that matter?

Kind regards,

Francis



-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Cave [mailto:francis at franciscave.com] 
Sent: 23 November 2015 18:53
To: 'Arms, Caroline' <caar at loc.gov>; 'MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)'
<eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>; e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
Subject: RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best
Practices document.

Caroline

I think that in general terms your example is fine. I think it could be
argued that it is unlikely that anyone would want to embed a whole ONIX for
Books Product Information Message in a WordprocessingML document. A more
realistic example would be to embed a single ONIX for Books Product record
relating to the document. However, the distinction might not be important
for our purposes.

Kind regards,

Francis



-----Original Message-----
From: Arms, Caroline [mailto:caar at loc.gov]
Sent: 23 November 2015 17:57
To: 'Francis Cave' <francis at franciscave.com>; 'MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)'
<eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>; e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
Subject: RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best
Practices document.

Murata-san, Francis,

I had been assuming a content/media type for XML  could be used for an ONIX
record.  Is there some reason something more specific is needed?

My comment about content/media type was more in relation to the steps Chris
indicated needed for his .mov example.  If a foreign/unknown part is added
to a package, should there be an appropriate entry in [Content-Types].xml?
I don't think it could be assumed  that there is already one.

Francis, apart from these details, are you happy with my  example in
general?

    Thanks.   Caroline


Caroline Arms
Library of Congress Contractor
Co-compiler of Sustainability of Digital Formats resource
http://www.digitalpreservation.gov/formats/

** Views expressed are personal and not necessarily those of the institution
**

-----Original Message-----
From: Francis Cave [mailto:francis at franciscave.com]
Sent: Monday, November 23, 2015 7:45 AM
To: 'MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)'; e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
Subject: RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best
Practices document.

Caroline, Murata-san

There is no registered media type for ONIX records, so far as I'm aware, but
I'll ask Graham Bell at EDItEUR about this, because if one is needed, I
guess that he should register it.

I don't have a strong view about the relationship type, but I think that out
of courtesy I will ask Graham Bell if he is happy for us to add a
relationship type for ONIX. I'm sure he won't mind.

As Caroline has indicated, there are two ONIX namespaces that are relevant
in this context:

http://ns.editeur.org/onix/3.0/reference
http://ns.editeur.org/onix/3.0/short

These namespaces refer to the two alternative tag name vocabularies that are
available to ONIX implementers. The short tag name schema is preferred in
North America, while the reference tag name schema is preferred in Europe
and Asia.

Kind regards,

Francis



-----Original Message-----
From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) [mailto:eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp]
Sent: 22 November 2015 02:32
To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
Subject: Re: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best
Practices document.

Caroline,

Thank you for your contribution!

> 1.  The first paragraph uses both 'foreign part' and 'unknown part.'
> I don't see 'foreign' and 'unknown' as quite synonymous. To me 
> 'foreign' means non-OOXML, but 'unknown' means not understood in some 
> context.  The use of both terms here is a bit confusing. Part 1 uses 
> 'unknown.'.  See Part 1, 9.1.4.  Should we clarify?  Or use 'foreign'
> throughout?

It appears that "foreign part" is never used in ISO/IEC 29500.
We should then use "unknown part" always.

> 2.  Is there any way to declare/register a relationship type that is 
> specific to ONIX or rich metadata?  Chris has just used example.org, 
> which was "established to be used for illustrative examples in 
> documents."  I would be hoping for something more appropriate.  Would 
> it be reasonable to use the same host as Editeur uses for ONIX 
> namespace URLs - which don't resolve?  An example of an ONIX namespace
> URI: is http://ns.editeur.org/onix/3.0/short

We have to define a relationship type for ONIX records.  I thought that EPUB
3 provides something similar, but it doesn not. (It rather relies on a
predefied relation "onix-record".)

In my understanding, we have not used namespace URIs as relationship types.
So, how about

	http://purl.oclc.org/ooxml/officeDocument/relationships/onix-record

?


> 3.  For a foreign part, is it necessary to make sure there is an 
> appropriate entry in [Content-Types].xml?  If so, that probably needs 
> to be said.

Yes.  Do we have a media type for ONIX records?  I googled but did not find
an answer.  Francis?

> 4.  I have to admit to always having been a bit confused by Part 1,
> 15.2.5 Custom XML Data Storage Part and whether that is also a way to 
> get "foreign" data into an OOXML document.  Is that construct worth a 
> mention in this Best Practices TR?

It is another way to put "foreign" data into an OOXML document.
If we encourage the use of this construct, we should mention it.  But, if
I'm not mistaken, we don't do so for a non-technical reason.

> 5. This one is for Rex: I was surprised to see "First, we need to add 
> the file to the OPC package:".  The use of "we" seemed odd.

Yes, avoid "we".

> As I
> worked, a several questions came to mind: Attached is my attempt to 
> introduce the second example into subclause 3.5.  Francis: Do you know 
> someone at Editeur? Might they be open to letting us use '
> http://ns.editeur.org/onix', say?  It's only an example, of course, 
> not normative.



Cheers,
Makoto