[sc34wg3] Comments on CXTM (N0454)

[Kal Ahmed]

Thanks for the comments! The detailed comments I will go through later, 
but there are a couple of general things that I would like to address now.

Lars Marius Garshol wrote:

>--- General
>
>This looks like it is implementable now. It would be interesting to
>hear whether the editor would encourage implementors to go ahead, or
>whether it is still better to wait for a more stable draft.
>  
>
I have been instructed by the WG to produce a CD and then make a call 
for implementations, so it seems that all great minds are thinking alike 
on this point :-)

>Also, maybe describing default values for XML Infoset properties
>(based on type) in a single place could be done to slim down the
>document? That might help with another problem as well: not all
>properties are given defined values everywhere.
>  
>
We discussed this and the general feeling was that it would be better to 
provide explicit values everywhere (including all the missing ones).
<snip>

>--- 4.5
>
>Here we refer to ISO 10646 character codes instead of Unicode scalar
>values as does TMDM. I realize the Infoset uses this terminology, but
>USV is a) consistent with TMDM, b) more accurate, and c) we can be
>consistent and reference Unicode instead of ISO 10646 everywhere.
>  
>
You will have to help me out here, because character sets are not my 
strong point. Are Unicode scalar values the same as 10646 character 
codes ? If not, won't this cause problems in the XML canonicalisation 
step ? I want to avoid having to write a CXTM-specific XML 
canonicalisation algorithm but just define an XML Infoset and then say 
"serialise this using CXML".

Cheers,

Kal