ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34 N260
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC34
Information
Technology --
Document Description and Processing Languages
|
TITLE: |
Summary of Voting on SC 34 N 220 - Draft Technical
Corrigendum Ballot on ISO/IEC 13250:2000 - Topic Maps |
|
SOURCE: |
SC
34 Secretariat |
|
PROJECT: |
|
|
PROJECT EDITOR: |
SC 34 / WG 3 |
|
STATUS: |
|
|
ACTION: |
The results of this ballot being forwarded
to WG 3 to address the national body comments received and submit a revised
text to be sent to ITTF for publication.
The revised text and project editor’s disposition of comments will be
sent to the SC 34 members for information and review. |
|
DATE: |
|
|
DISTRIBUTION: |
SC34 and Liaisons |
|
REFER TO: |
|
|
REPLY TO: |
Dr. James David Mason |
SC 34 N 260
2001-10-04
SC 34 Voting Summary on JTC 1/SC 34 N 220
Draft Technical Corrigendum Ballot on ISO/IEC 13250:2000 - Topic Maps
|
P-Member |
APPROVAL OF THE
DRAFT AS PRESENTED |
APPROVAL OF THE
DRAFT WITH COMMENTS AS GIVEN ON THE ATTACHED |
DISAPPROVAL OF THE DRAFT
FOR REASONS ON THE ATTACHED |
Acceptance of these
reasons and appropriate changes in the text will change our vote to approval |
ABSTENTION (For Reasons
Below): |
|
Brazil |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Canada |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
China |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Denmark |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
France |
|
|
|
|
X |
|
Ireland |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Italy |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Japan |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
Republic of Korea |
|
|
|
|
|
|
Netherlands |
X |
|
|
|
|
|
Norway |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
United Kingdom |
|
X |
|
|
|
|
United States |
|
X |
|
|
|
According to the JTC 1 Directives, Section 14.4.9.4.5
If the general results of the SC ballot were positive, but some comments were received, the SC Secretariat shall also forward the comments of the Project Editor for review when the voting results are distributed to the SC in accordance with 14.4.9.4.3 above. The Project Editor shall prepare responses to the comments and return them to the SC Secretariat together with a revised text of the draft technical corrigendum if any modification has resulted from the editor’s review. The SC Secretariat shall distribute the revised text and disposition of comments report to the SC for information, and shall proceed with the submittal to ITTF in accordance with 14.4.9.4.4 above (for publication). Each technical corrigendum shall list the status of all amendments and technical corrigenda to the current edition of the standard.
SC 34 National Body Comments on N 226
Japan
1.
The descriptions:
"Copyright 2000-2001 TopicMaps.Org. All rights reserved. Permission to use, copy, modify and distribute the XTM ........ purpose. It is provided "as is" without expressed or implied warranty."
should be indicated as comments
within the XML DTD. The comments should include the public identifier for
invocation of the XML DTD.
2.
The relationship between the elements/attributes of the XML DTD and those
defined in the main body of ISO/IEC 13250 should be described.
3.
Remove the clauses of "Defect Report on Topic Maps (ISO/IEC
13250:2000)".
4. Add the corrections in SC34 N238 and N239.
Norway
The
relationship between the existing DTD and this new one should be defined in
normative text, and this normative text needs to be published and finalized as
soon as possible. This normative text should take the form of a formal model,
with directions on how to build instances of the model from SGML and XML
documents.
Annex
C:
the copyright statement in the DTD
needs to have '' added around it the names of the authors should be added to
the comment as a matter of courtesy the following paragraph should be added to
the comment:
"A provisional explication of this DTD can be found at
http://www.topicmaps.org/xtm/1.0/"
United Kingdom
The
UK approves this proposed Technical Corrigendum but asks the Project Editor to
take note of the following comments.
1.
The UK appreciates the substantial work done in developing the XTM 1.0 DTD but
considers that the DTD should be included in a non-normative annex. The
UK considers that there
are several possible ways of representing topic maps in XML and the inclusion
of the XTM 1.0 DTD should not constrain the use of the standard such that it
creates problems for alternative implementations. The UK considers that any
unreasonable constraints can be avoided by making the annex non-normative and
changing any imperative requirements to recommendations by replacing
occurrences of the word ‘must’ to ‘should’.
2.
Text included in ISO standards cannot include third-party copyright statements.
Remove
"Copyright 2000-2001 TopicMaps.Org. All rights reserved."
The
following comments are offered as possible improvements to the DTD:
3.
The proposed DTD does not allow the expression of all functionality of ISO/IEC
13250. It should be possible to record facets at the very least.
4.
The proposed DTD provides features that are not part of ISO/IEC 13250. The
following are additional to the requirements of the standard and should be
identified as such.
mergeMap,
instanceOf, subjectIndicator and subjectIndicatorRef
5.
The proposed DTD does not distinguish variants used as sort names from variants
used as alternative display versions.
United States
Normative text needs to be added to explain the relationship between the XTM DTD and the original HyTime architectural form meta-DTD.