N0484b - CXTM Ballot - ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34

Vote on Committee Draft CD 13250-4

Date of circulation:
2004-02-06

Closing date:
2004-05-06

Reference number ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 N0484

ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 34 Information Technology -- Document Description and Processing Languages

Secretariat: Canada (SCC)

Circulated to P-members of the committee for voting

Please return all votes and comments in electronic form directly to the SC Secretariat by the due date indicated.

CD 13250-4

Title: Information Technology -- Topic Maps -- Canonical Syntax

Vote:

_____	APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT AS PRESENTED
__X__	APPROVAL OF THE DRAFT WITH COMMENTS AS GIVEN ON THE ATTACHED
_X_	general:
_X_	technical:
_X_	editorial:
_____	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):

P-member voting: Japan

Date: 2004-04-10

Submitted by: Yushi KOMACHI

Attachment:
Japan's Comments on ISO/IEC CD 13250-4 (SC34 N484): Topic Maps - Canonicalization

(0) General comment

The relationship between ISO/IEC 13250-4 and 13250-3 is NOT clear. The two standards give data models based on the syntax with XML, and the data model in 13250-4 is expected to be a canonical version of that in 13250-3. The clear description on such a relationship should be given in 13250-4.

(1) Clause 2 (technical comments)

ISO/IEC 13250-2 should be added as a Normative reference.

ISO/IEC 13250-3 should be added as a Normative reference.

The version of "The Unicode Standard" should be 4.0.

"RELAX-NG Compact Syntax, OASIS standard" should be added as a Normative reference. After the Amd.1 to ISO/IEC 19757-2 has been published, the OASIS standard should be replaced with the Amd.1.

(2) Clause 3, Para. 3 (technical comments)

Clarify the notation of [var:P].

The process should be specified more comprehensively introducing some appropriate examples.

Does CXTM mean Canonical Xml Topic Map? If so, how are other syntaxes, e.g., LTM?

(3) Clause 4.4, Para. 2 (technical comments)

"Canonical ordering" should be defined to clarify the specification of this para.2. Some examples should be added for more comprehensive specification.

(4) Introduction, Para. 4 (editorial comment)

The description
".... defines a canonical sort order for any set of of information ...." should be
".... defines a canonical sort order for any set of information ....".

Address Reply to: