Clause 9: Physical package

[caroline arms]

Murata-san,

As I turn to these questions of yours, can you redistribute the URL for the
latest draft.

   Thanks.    Caroline

On Tue, Apr 17, 2018 at 1:14 AM, MURATA Makoto <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>
wrote:

> Dear colleagues,
>
> I am reviewing Clause 9 (physical package) of OPC.
>
> Here are some ideas (to be discussed in the next teleconference).
>
> 1. Use "abstract model" rather than "package model", although "package
> model" is heavily used now.
>
> 2. Use "abstract package", "physical package", or "package" (if obvious
> from the context).
>
> 3. Drop 9.2.3.4 (Setting a Part Media Type in the Media Types Stream) and
> 9.2.3.5 (Determining a Part Media Type from the Media Types Stream).
> Clearly specify semantics in 9.2.3.2 (Media Types Stream Markup).
>
> 4. Do not use "physical package format".  Instead, use "physical format"
> (such as ZIP) or "physical model" (the combination of a physical
> format and a mapping from abstract packages), depending on the
> context.
>
> 5. Merge 9.3.6 ZIP Package Limitations and Annex B. Both are
> about OPC-specific restrictions on ZIP.
>
> 6. Use "ZIP file" rather than "ZIP archive", since the PKWARE
> specification uses the former.  Likewise, use "ZIP archive format"
> rather than "ZIP file format".
>
> 7. Clearly specify physical package items.
>
> 8. Continue to use "ZIP item", although this term is never used in the
> ZIP file format specification.
>
> 9. Explicitly state that the general purpose bit 11 shall be set,
> if ZIP item names use Unicode characters beyond UTF-8.
>
> 10. Do we allow ZIP files to contain zip items not representing parts?
> 29500-1 allows unknown parts (9.1.4) and trash items (9.1.5),. but
> disallows invalid parts (9.1.6).
>
> Regards,
> Makoto
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20180504/ad2f555e/attachment.html>