[sc34wg3] Part 4: Canonicalization

[Lars Marius Garshol]

* Martin Bryan
|
| It makes sense, but needs to be spelt out in the standard, rather
| than expect readers to know arcane aspects of a referenced standard.

* Kal Ahmed
| 
| Well, the XML Information Set Rec is a normative reference from the
| CXTM Specification, so I'm a little wary of copying or
| reinterpreting what the W3C have already said on this. I'm willing
| to take guidance on this point though - is it a good idea to
| copy/restate what an normatively referenced document says for
| clarity? If so, is there a right place and a wrong place to do this?

I think you are right, Kal. Either we reuse the Information Set
formalism, or we don't. If we do, then referring to the XML Infoset is
the right thing to do, not repeating bits of that specification in ISO
13250-4. 

ISO 13250-2 is also based on it, so it would be bizarre if only -4 did
this. What might make sense, however, is if ISO 13250-1 included some
informative guidance on how to read the rest of the standard,
including how to understand the information set formalism. In fact,
that's probably a good idea.

-- 
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian         <URL: http://www.ontopia.net >
GSM: +47 98 21 55 50                  <URL: http://www.garshol.priv.no >