Third try -- RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE Best Practices document.

Wed Jan 13 03:27:23 CET 2016

Caroline,

Thank you very much!

I guess that the relationship in the second example (ONIX) is a package
relationship.  Is this correct?

Regards,
Makoto

2015-12-31 21:40 GMT+09:00 Arms, Caroline <caar at loc.gov>:

> Rex and Darrin,
>     Attached is my revision for the section on embedding foreign parts in
> the MCE Guidelines.  It uses the suggestion from Francis to put the new
> parts into folders -- which we agreed on the call was a good idea.  You
> said that you should be able to create the appropriate diagram.
>
> Happy New Year!
>
>    Caroline
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Francis Cave [mailto:francis at franciscave.com]
> Sent: Thursday, December 10, 2015 11:52 AM
> To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: RE: Second try -- RE: Action item on additional example for
> Foreign Part in MCE Best Practices document.
>
> Looks good to me. But I wonder if it's a good idea to put a foreign part
> on the root of the package. Maybe it slightly complicates the picture, but
> I'd have thought that it would be better to put it inside a folder, e.g.
> 'movies' in your first example and 'meta' in your second example.
>
> Francis
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arms, Caroline [mailto:caar at loc.gov]
> Sent: 10 December 2015 14:32
> To: Francis Cave <francis at franciscave.com>;
> e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: RE: Second try -- RE: Action item on additional example for
> Foreign Part in MCE Best Practices document.
>
> Here is proposed substance for this section of the guidelines.  I did not
> define the term "foreign part" in a formal way because I did not know
> whether a formal definition belonged in a Terms and Definitions section.
>
> I chose to drop Tracked Changes because the section is mostly new and is
> easier to read that way.  I make no claim for correct formatting!
>
>    Thanks for the feedback.   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: Wednesday, December 09, 2015 5:32 PM
> To: Arms, Caroline; e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: RE: Second try -- RE: Action item on additional example for
> Foreign Part in MCE Best Practices document.
>
> Hi Caroline
>
> I suggest that you use '.xml' as the extension for an ONIX filename.
>
> I agree that Part 1 is clear as to the meaning of "unknown part", so I
> think we should avoid using this term with a different meaning in the MCE
> Best Practices document, as it would be confusing for implementers.
>
> However, should we define "foreign part" to be specific to OOXML? A more
> general definition of "foreign part" might be "a part whose specified
> relationship type is not defined by the MCE implementation". That would
> make the guidance applicable to implementations of MCE other than
> implementations of OOXML (Parts 1, 2 and 4).
>
> Kind regards,
>
> Francis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Arms, Caroline [mailto:caar at loc.gov]
> Sent: 09 December 2015 21:53
> To: Arms, Caroline <caar at loc.gov>; 'Francis Cave' <francis at franciscave.com>;
> e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: Second try -- RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign
> Part in MCE Best Practices document.
>
> My apologies for not getting another draft of this out yet.  I've been
> swamped with special requests from the Library before the end of my current
> contract.
>
> Today I got started and realized that I still had questions that might be
> easier to pose directly rather than in comments on a new draft.
>
> First -- in relation to the foreign/unknown terminology
>
> From Part 1
>
> "9.1.4 Unknown Parts
> With the exception of relationship parts, all other parts in an Office
> Open XML document that are not the target of an implicit or explicit
> relationship are considered unknown parts. Unknown parts shall be ignored
> on document consumption and can, but need not, be discarded on production."
>
> ***This seems to imply that a part that is given a relationship as Chris
> suggests is NOT an unknown part.
>
> Again from Part 1
> "9.1.7 Unknown Relationships
> All relationships not defined within ECMA-376 are considered unknown
> relationships. Unknown relationships are permitted within an Office Open
> XML document provided that they conform to relationship markup guidelines
> as defined by the OPC specification. Specifically:
> *  Conforming consumers shall not fail to load a document containing
> unknown relationships.
> *  Conforming producers that are also consumers can, but are not required
> to, roundtrip and preserve unknown relationships and their target parts."
>
> *** So Chris's recommendation is actually to use an "unknown" relationship
> type not to use an "unknown part."  So I propose to use the term "foreign
> part" to mean a part with a relationship type not defined in OOXML.
>
> Does that make sense?
>
> Back to Part 1 on the content type question I raised which no-one
> responded to.
>
> "9.1.6 Invalid Parts
> ZIP archive items that do not conform to OPC part naming guidelines or are
> not associated with a content type shall not be allowed in an Office Open
> XML document, with the exception of items specifically defined by ECMA-
> 376-2 and trash items."
>
> *** This seems to require a declaration in /[Content_Types].xml that
> covers the type of the added "foreign" part.  Chris's draft does not
> mention that requirement.  Do others agree that it is a requirement?  If
> so, I will extend the discussion of the first example to include that.
>
> I see the following in a minimal .docx file that I created in Word
> <Default Extension="xml" ContentType="application/xml"/>
>
> I'm going to assume that for the .mov file in the example from Chris, the
> following would be adequate:
> <Default Extension="mov" ContentType="video/quicktime"/>
>        See https://www.iana.org/assignments/media-types/video/quicktime
>
> Looking at the ONIX documentation for guidance on file extension use:
> From
>
> http://www.editeur.org/files/ONIX%203/ONIX_for_Books_Release3-0_html_Best_Pr
> actice+codes_Issue_31_v1-2-7.zip
>   ONIX file names commonly include the '.xml', '.onix' or '.onx' suffix
> (the first two are preferred).
>   The mime type should typically be 'application/xml', ...
>
> Francis,     Do you have any suggestions as to which of .xml or .onix I
> should use for the ONIX example?  Or would you recommend covering both
> possibilities in my example?
>
> I hope to have more time before tomorrow's call to work on revised text.
>
>       Caroline
>
> PS: Apologies for sending a dud message.  My touchpad took control!!
>
> 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: Arms, Caroline [mailto:caar at loc.gov]
> Sent: Friday, November 27, 2015 2:25 PM
> To: 'Francis Cave'; e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE
> Best Practices document.
>
> Francis,  Thanks again.  Taking a quick look at the schemas, I'm inclined
> to use the 'reference' version as an example, because if anyone actually
> followed things up, they would find tag names that are less cryptic.
>
> I'll plan on doing a next draft, taking into account the feedback so far,
> sometime next week.
>
>     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: Friday, November 27, 2015 6:48 AM
> To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: RE: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE
> Best Practices document.
>
> After a further exchange with Graham I think that, if we wish to include
> an ONIX example, we should use 'application/xml' for the media type. We can
> use the same URI for both namespace and relationship type, so either '
> http://ns.editeur.org/onix/3.0/reference' or '
> http://ns.editeur.org/onix/3.0/short', depending upon which tag set we
> choose to use.
>
> Francis
>
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) [mailto:eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp]
> Sent: 27 November 2015 03:30
> To: e-SC34-WG4 at ecma-international.org
> Subject: Re: Action item on additional example for Foreign Part in MCE
> Best Practices document.
>
> Francis,
>
> Thank you very much!
>
> A specialized media type for ONIX would make sense if there is some
> special processing (such as ONIX fragment identifiers).
>
> So far, in OOXML,  URIs for namespace names and those for relationship
> types are different.  But I do not see strong reasons for separating them.
> Namespace names should be changed only for intentionally destroy existing
> application programs for new data.  When should we change relationship
> names?  Probably,when we would like to prohibit existing OOXML applications
> from accessing new parts.  Then, it might be a good idea to use the same
> URI.
>
> I don't think that namespace names or relationship types have to be
> resolved.  They are just names.  Thus, I don't think that performance is an
> issue.
>
> Regards,
> Makoto
>
>
>
>

-- 

Praying for the victims of the Japan Tohoku earthquake

Makoto
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20160113/47eb91c5/attachment-0001.html>