Re: vCard XML DTD comments 02

[Martin Lee <martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

I wanted to reply to the comments of Randal Leavitt that havent been
already addressed.


1) "... However, if we want to have a vCard in Chinese what do we do?
Tokens such
as "VOICE" and "MSG" will not be vary understandable in China. I think
we need a
separate DTD for each language. ..."
This is an implementation issue. The DTD is not visible to the end user,
neither should the
raw data be, it needs to be interpreted by a parser and presented in an
appropriate way
to the user. Only the developer needs to understand the DTD, if they
need an entire
translation of the specification then they need to have it translated.
Appropriate language attributes for tags and use of unicode mark-up
should make a
vCard-XML document presentable in any language.


2 ) "In Section 2 the attribute "lang" is defined. I think it would be
better to declare this
attribute as "xml:lang" to more closely follow the XML standard."
I agree. The two attributes are identical. "lang value is a valid RFC
1766 language string",
from the  DTD. "The values of the attribute [xml:lang]  are language
identifiers as defined
by IETF RFC 1766" from http://www.w3.org/TR/1998/REC-xml-19980210 , the
XML
1.0 specification. I would suggest as it is an XML definition we should
use XML properties
where possible and not define our own syntax where identical
functionality is already
provided by XML itself. Therefore use the predefined xml:lang attribute
in place of an
identical but self defined lang attribute.


4) "The "lang" attribute is specified for many of the vCard elements.
This is not pragmatic.
It should only be an attribute of the vCard element itself, and should
apply to the whole
card. "
I disagree the vCard refers to an instance of a person who may be known
by different
names or have different expresions of their properties in different
languages. If I receive
one vCard with a choice of language representations for that person,
then I may choose
the representation I prefer to suit my prefered language. If I receive
two different vCards
one in English, one in French for example I have no way of knowing if
this relates to two
individuals one a French man, one an English man who have similar
properties or to two
representations of one individual.

5) "In the entity "prop.tel" I would include another child element
called "web" or "net"
and remove the "url" element in "prop.exp"."
This would break the DTD's representation of RFC 2426 (the goal of the
group). In any
case the structure of an XML document does not represent the
'importance' of any piece
of information just how it is ordered.

7) "The element "n" forces me to give my family name first.".
Only in the data, an implementation may choose to prompt you for a
family name later,
equally it could display names in any order.

8) "The element "n" will be valid if both the family name and given name
are omitted."
I agree, <!ELEMENT n (family*,given*,other*,prefix*,suffix*)> isnt
right. I think
<!ELEMENT n(family?,given?,other*,prefix*,suffix*)> is better, but I
this doesnt
solve the problem of omitting family and given names. But then again RFC
2426 has
the same problem.
If I'm being formal I might just want to give my name as Mr. Lee, to a
friend
I might be just 'Martin'. I see no way of solving this without forcing
someone to give
one name or the other, which I dont want to do. Ideas?


Martin

begin:vcard 
n:Lee;Martin
tel;fax:+44 (207) 757 2699
tel;work:+44 (207) 757 2659
x-mozilla-html:FALSE
url:http://www.ebookers.com
org:Ebookers.com
adr:;;34-42 Woburn Place;London;;WC1H 0TA;England
version:2.1
email;internet:martin@xxxxxxxxxxxx
title:Ecommerce Programmer
x-mozilla-cpt:;25760
fn:Martin Lee
end:vcard