Revisiting our decision to create a list of all namespace names for core properties in Annex E

[MURATA Makoto]

Dear colleagues,

In Seattle, we decided to create a list of the namespace names
for core properties as part of Annex E.  I investigated and
concluded that this decision has to be revisited.

At present, all namespace names and media types listed in
Annex E are our own.  Those defined by somebody else are not
listed.  In particular, the namespace name for digital
signatures (http://www.w3.org/2000/09/xmldsig#) is not listed.
It is the XML DSig commendation that defines this namespace.
Annex E (which is normative) does not repeat this definition.

In the case of core properties, there are three namespaces:

http://schemas.openxmlformats.org/package/2006/metadata/core-properties
http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/
http://purl.org/dc/terms/
The first one is our own and is already listed in Annex E.

The other two are not our own.  They are defined by Dublin
Core and DCMI Metadata.  We should not define them in Annex E.

We do need some wordsmithing.  I will take care of it.

Regards,
Makoto


This message has been scanned for malware by Forcepoint. www.forcepoint.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20180927/6460f74a/attachment.html>