Schema for Composite Font Representation format (was RE: [mpeg-OTspec] AHG Kick-off)

[Levantovsky, Vladimir]

Yes, the text of the standard is normative (unless something is clearly marked otherwise) and the text of the annex may be treated as either depending on its designation. Since the text always takes priority, I would consider the mistake in DTD (duplication of 'tx' attribute) to be simply a typo and, therefore, subject to editorial correction.

Thank you,
Vladimir


> -----Original Message-----
> From: Ken Lunde [mailto:lunde at adobe.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, February 28, 2012 2:12 PM
> To: Dave Pawson
> Cc: Levantovsky, Vladimir; mpeg-OTspec at yahoogroups.com
> Subject: Re: Schema for Composite Font Representation format (was RE:
> [mpeg-OTspec] AHG Kick-off)
> 
> Dave,
> 
> Someone can correct me if I am wrong, but my understanding is that the
> text is implicitly normative, and that the DTD is explicitly normative
> ("normative" in parentheses follows Annex A).
> 
> -- Ken
> 
> On Feb 28, 2012, at 10:47 AM, Dave Pawson wrote:
> 
> > On 28 February 2012 18:44, Ken Lunde <lunde at adobe.com> wrote:
> >> Dave,
> >>
> >> I just went through your RelaxNG schema with the proverbial fine-
> tooth comb, and doing so uncovered another minor error in the DTD,
> which I already conveyed to Vladimir. The Matrix element has six
> attributes, but your schema had only five. The second instance of the
> "tx" attribute should instead be "ty" (note that it is correct in the
> text of the standard, meaning in Section 5.11). I found no other
> problems or irregularities with either the DTD nor your schema.
> >>
> >> Regards...
> >>
> >> -- Ken
> >
> >
> >
> > Thanks Ken.
> >  Which is normative btw? DTD/ Text.... or
> >
> >
> > regards
> >
> > --
> > Dave Pawson
> > XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
> > Docbook FAQ.
> > http://www.dpawson.co.uk