4. PresentationML Reference Material
From OOXML-Wiki
[edit] 4.2.9
tags (Customer Data Tags) Typo in line 23, “PresenationML”
[edit] 4.2 [29-30]
This section defines complex types that allow the capture of attribute values as well as elements. In practice it defines no "elements" as such, only referencing elements defined elsewhere.
[edit] 4.3.1.4
Is the defined maximum limit of 10 for the clrMru element too small for some applications? Why is this the only element constrained with a maxOccurs other than 1 or unbounded?
[edit] 4.3.1.10 [6]
The definition of the charset attribute contains the sentence "Specifies the most similar character set to the one being used." Subjective phrases such as "most similar" are extremely woolly and should be avoided in standards. The same phrase is used in the definition of the pitchFamily attribute.
[edit] 4.3.1.35
smartTags element specifies existence of Smart Tags, but no reference to what these constructs are, or where to find a definition of them elsewhere in the standard.
[edit] 4.6
Animation
Typo in line 6 “The schema describes all the animations effects on that reside on a slide”
Typo in line 10? “All elements described in this schema are contained within the slide XML file. More superficially they are in the...” The word “specifically” would make more sense.
Both of these typos are also found in sub-clause 4.4.1 of the section on PresentationML contained in Part 3 – Primer, (p. 250 lines 1 and 5.)
[edit] 4.8.6 [14]
The restricted list of values provided in the list of supportable browsers, which only includes IE3, IE4 and Netscape3 and Netscape4, is totally unacceptable for an international standard. The list must be extensible to allow for updates as new browsers appear. It must also include all existing browsers. The phrase "The following are possible enumeration values for this type:" suggests that these are only some possible values, but the following sentence states categorically that "The following XML Schema fragment defines the contents of this simple type:". Clarify whether or not this list is extensible and if it is make the example list clearly an example and more up-to-date and inclusive than its current listings. Note that for interoperability reasons, allowing each user community to define its own names may lead to problems: a registry of commonly accepted browser identifiers should be set up to aid interoerability and be referenced in this section.
[edit] Page 5.4.2 [23]
Ambiguous comments that looks like something is missing.
Proposed change: Add missing part of XML example or remove the ambiguous comment.
[edit] Page 22 [3]
References to www.contoso.com should be replaced with references to generic www.example.com.
Proposed change: Do not refer to a Microsoft internal beta site for an unannounced product.
[edit] 7 - Citations [13]
URL refers to RFC documents at a different location to the rest of the standard. RFC docs are issued by IETF and not W3C.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.w3.org/Protocols/rfc2616/rfc2616.html) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt).
[edit] Page 8.2.2 [13]
In a description of name spaces a reference is made to http://www.woodgroveBank.com. This URL yields a security warning and it is bad form to refer to a company web site (especially in my view, one that belongs to a bank) in this way.
Proposed change: Replace with a dummy URL. Contoso is again used here as well.
[edit] 13.3.1 [5]
Namespace for author initials does not allow for more than one person to share the same initials without combining with the ID value as a unique key. Mary Anne Smith and Maurice Albert Stone both have the initials MAS. The ID and colour would distinguish them but when querying the XML, comments from both would be aggregated.
Proposed change: Ensure that duplicates are extended by a numeric suffix so that the namespace remains unpolluted.
[edit] 15.2.2 [Table 1]
The URL describing the audio/x-me-wax does not exist.
Proposed change: Replace http://msdn.microsoft.com/library/en-us/wmplay10/mmp_sdk/asx_elementsintro.asp with a static URL that is guaranteed to always exist.
[edit] 15.2.14 [4]
Misleading URL (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Carbon/Reference/CarbonPrintingManager_Ref/Reference/refer4 ence.html). Does not exist and describes deprecated functionality in Mac OS.
Proposed change: Remove all references to Carbon implementation when describing Mac OS functionality and replace them with the corresponding descriptions of contemporary Mac OS X Cocoa implementations. Carbon is a compatibility shim, which allows developers to continue using legacy Mac OS Classic (System 9 and earlier) applications source code. It should not be referred to in a forward looking standard or specification. This is a better URL (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/Printing/index.html) because it refers to the Carbon, Cocoa and CUPS printing documentation. Go up a level to (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/) for the index to all developer documentation topics when correcting other references.
[edit] 15.2.16 [Table 1]
Most entries describe references to technical specifications. The QuickTime entry describes a reference to a trademark licencing page.
Proposed change: Replace (http://developer.apple.com/softwarelicensing/agreements/quicktime.html) with (http://developer.apple.com/documentation/QuickTime/index.html) which is a more useful reference when referring to technical material on QuickTime.
[edit] Annexes
Overall - must check that these bibliographic references are to permanent pages with a guaranteed lifetime; can ECMA assure us that this has been arranged?
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [8]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2045.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [10]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc2616.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [12]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3066.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [14]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3339.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [16]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3629.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [18]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt)
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [19]
The Unicode standard is now at revision 5 as of July 2006.
Proposed change: Unless this standard is specifically only designed to operate with Unicode 4, you should check any references to Unicode technology and ensure they are compliant with Unicode version 5.
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [23]
URL does not exist (http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xml-20040204/xml11-20040204/).
Proposed change: Replace with a persistent URL. The reference is to an out of date third edition. The fourth edition is at this URL (http://www.w3.org/TR/2006/REC-xml-20060816/).
[edit] Annexe A: Bibliography [3 (p.162)]
The reference to the application note has a URL that is somewhat generalised and requires further searching. It also lacks a trailing slash character. (http://www.pkware.com)
Proposed change: More specific URL for this is (http://www.pkware.com/documents/casestudies/APPNOTE.TXT).
[edit] Annexe B: Bibliography [12]
Ambiguous URL.
Proposed change: Replace (http://www.rfc-editor.org) with (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc3986.txt).
[edit] Annexe B: Bibliography [13]
Missing URL.
Proposed change: Add (http://www.ietf.org/rfc/rfc4234.txt).
[edit] Annexe B: Bibliography [lines 9,10,14,15 and 16]
Inconsistent with other documents. Missing URL and reference needs to be checked for whether it is the latest revision.
Proposed change: Add reference to correct W3C document.
[edit] Annexe I: Bibliography [7]
Inconsistent reference to Unicode 3. Other bibliographies refer to Unicode 4 but Unicode 5 is current.
Proposed change: Bring up to date.
[edit] Annexe I: Bibliography [general]
Many references are made to RFC and W3C documents with ambiguous or missing URLs. Sometimes the documents are not the latest version.
Proposed change: All bibliographic references should be rechecked to ensure they are up to date, relevant to the standard and have URLs that will persist permanently (permalinks).
[edit] Page 1246 [15]
Another reference to the contoso internal microsoft beta test software (also at 7.5.2.1 and 8.2.1).
Proposed change: Remove all references to contoso throughout the standard.
[edit] Page 1302 [8]
Typographic styling of this reference is different to other URL references.
Proposed change: Decide on a typographic style model and stick to it. Check throughout the entire standard to ensure styling is consistent.
[edit] Page 1536 [3]
DO NOT refer to real target web sites in URLs unless they are meaningfully related to the standard. This is most definitely not related to the standard.
Proposed change: Here is yet another inconsistent example URL quoted. Replace with http://www.example.com/
[edit] Page 1601 [Middle column in table]
http://example.com/ inconsistent usage.
Proposed change: Replace with http://www.example.com/
[edit] Pages 1905, 1916, 1917 [Codepage]
This refers to a very Windows Specific Unicode page without making it clear that if you walk further up the tree there are code page mapping for other platforms and environments.
Proposed change: Add a reference to and description of (http://www.unicode.org/Public/MAPPINGS/).
[edit] Page 5142 [9]
Bullets in table that list some URLs are not consistently styled. They also contain a reference to Contoso again.
Proposed change: Correct the URLs and the presentation styling.
