ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32/WG2 N1792
Date: 2013-05-29
REPLACES: —
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32
Data Management and Interchange
Secretariat: United States of America (ANSI)
Administered by Farance Inc. on behalf of ANSI
DOCUMENT TYPE
Summary of Voting/Table of Replies - Editor's Draft Resolution of Comments
TITLE
Summary of Voting on 32N2280 ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5 Information
Technology - Metadata Registries (MDR) - Part 5: Naming and identification
principles, Ed 3 - Editor's Draft Resolution of Comments
SOURCE
Editor, 11179-5
PROJECT NUMBER
1.32.15.03.05.00
STATUS
WG2 is requested to resolve the comments. The document did not obtain
substantial support.
REFERENCES
ACTION ID.
ACT
REQUESTED
ACTION
DUE DATE
Number of Pages
16
LANGUAGE USED
English
DISTRIBUTION
P & L Members
SC Chair
WG Conveners and Secretaries
Dr. Timothy Schoechle, Secretary, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32
Farance Inc *, 3066 Sixth Street, Boulder, CO, United States of America
Telephone: +1 303-443-5490; E-mail: Timothy@Schoechle.org
available from the JTC 1/SC 32 WebSite http://www.jtc1sc32.org/
*Farance Inc. administers the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Secretariat on behalf of ANSI
ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 N2331
Summary of Voting on Document SC 32 N 2280
Title: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5 Information Technology - Metadata Registries (MDR) - Part 5:
Naming and identification principles, Ed 3
Project: 1.32.15.03.05.00
“P” Member
Approval
Approval
Disapprov Abstention
with
al with
with
Comments Comments Comments
Canada
1
China
1
Czech Republic
1
Egypt
1
Finland
1
Germany
1
India
1
Japan
1
Korea, Republic of
1
Portugal
1
Russian Federation
1
United Kingdom
1
United States
1
Total “P”
6
1
3
3
“O” Member
Austria
Belgium
France
1
Ghana
Hungary
Indonesia
Italy
Kazakhstan
Netherlands, The
Norway
Romania
Poland
Sweden
Switzerland
Total “O”
Dr. Timothy Schoechle, Secretary, ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32
Farance Inc *, 3066 Sixth Street, Boulder, CO, United States of America
Telephone: +1 303-443-5490; E-mail: Timothy@Schoechle.org
available from the JTC 1/SC 32 WebSite http://www.jtc1sc32.org/
*Farance Inc. administers the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 32 Secretariat on behalf of ANSI
COMMENTS:
Canada
NO. See comments below:
Finland
ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and interest.
India
ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and interest.
Japan
YES. See comments below:
Portugal
ABSTAIN. Lack of expertise and interest.
United Kingdom
NO. See comments below:
United States
NO. See comments below:
Document: N2280
Date: 2013-04-01
MB/
NC1
CA00
Line
number
All
Clause/
Subclause
All
Paragraph/
Figure/
Table/
Type of
comment2
-
ge
Comments
Canada disapproves of the draft for the reasons
below. Since the new template allows for text to
be referenced using line numbers, we generated
a line numbered version of the text which is
attached at the bottom of this document, and we
have referenced those line numbers in our
comments.
Proposed change
Canada will change its vote to Approval if the
comments below are satisfactorily addressed.
Canada asks that future ballot texts include line
numbers so that:
a)
all NBs can reference them in making their
ballot comments; and,
b)
The Project Editor(s) can collate all NB
comments by line reference in order to
prepare a single integrated document of all
NB comments, thereby greatly facilitating
resolution of ballot comments pertaining to
similar NB comments and resolving the
same..
Project:CD2 11179-5
Observations of the
secretariat
The editor will attempt to
use the version with line
numbers; note that the
version generated by CA
did not convey on the
originally distributed copy
of these comments.
CA0
1
113
0Introduction
Para 6
Ed
The use of 'They' at the beginning of a paragraph
requires the reader to look backwards to see
what it refers to.
Change 'They' to 'Names'.
accepted
CA0
2
128, 130
1-Scope
Para 1
Te
The response to comment CN01 on the previous
ballot stated that 'Identification' should be
dropped from the title of the document. If this is
accepted, then all reference to Identification
should be removed.
Remove the discussion of Identification from the
Scope, except to refer the reader to Edition 3 of
part 6. This should be done via a footnote.
accepted; a resolution from
WG2 is in process.
166
3.1
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
179
3.4
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
182
3.5
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
193
3.8
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
202
3.10
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
207
3.11
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
Make the correction.
accepted
CA
03
CA
04
CA
05
CA
06
CA
07
CA
1
2
MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
page 1 of 16
ISO/IEC electronic balloting commenting template/version 2012-03
Document: N2280
Date: 2013-04-01
MB/
NC1
08
CA
09
CA
10
Line
number
Clause/
Subclause
Paragraph/
Figure/
Table/
Type of
comment2
Comments
Proposed change
Project:CD2 11179-5
Observations of the
secretariat
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
243
3.21
Reference
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
265, 266
4
Conformanc
e
Para 1
Ed
In the first sentence:
Reword as:
accepted
"A registry containing a set of
designatable items associated with a
namespace which conform to naming
conventions so that:"
"A registry containing a namespace
associated with a set of designatable items
which conform to naming conventions so
that:"
It is unclear on a first reading that "which
conform" is supposed to refer back to the
'designatable items', not the namespace.
The sentence needs to be clarified.
CA
11
275
CA
12
276, 277
4
Conformanc
e
Para 2
4
Conformanc
e
Para 3
Ed
Ed
The use of 'shall be' seems inappropriate in:
Reword as:
"A registry in which every namespace conforms
to this part of 11179 shall be a conforming
registry."
"A registry in which every namespace conforms to
this part of 11179 is a conforming registry."
In the sentence:
Reword as:
"A registry containing a set of
designatable items associated with a
namespace which conform to naming
conventions so that:"
accepted
accepted
"A registry containing a namespace
associated with a set of designatable items
which conform to naming conventions so
that:"
It is unclear on a first reading that "which
conform" is supposed to refer back to the
'designatable items', not the namespace.
The sentence needs to be clarified.
CA
13
286, 287
CA
291
1
2
4
Conformanc
e
Para 4
5
Reference
Ed
Ed
The use of 'shall be' seems inappropriate in:
accepted
"A registry in which every namespace strictly
conforms to this part of 11179 shall be a strictly
conforming registry."
Reword as:
"A registry in which every namespace strictly
conforms to this part of 11179 is a strictly
conforming registry."
and remove the extra space before 2nd 'strictly'.
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
Make the correction.
accepted
MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
page 2 of 16
ISO/IEC electronic balloting commenting template/version 2012-03
Date: 2013-04-01
MB/
NC1
14
CA
15
CA
16
CA
17
CA
18
Line
number
Clause/
Subclause
Paragraph/
Figure/
Table/
Type of
comment2
CA
20
Project:CD2 11179-5
Proposed change
Observations of the
secretariat
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
in Line 1
CA1
9
Comments
Document: N2280
340
8.1.1
Line 1
Ed
The reference to Clause 4 should be Clause 5.
Make the correction.
accepted
350
8.1.2
Para 2
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
354
8.1.3
Para 3
Ed
The reference to [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2012] should
be [ISO/IEC 11179-3:2013]
Make the correction.
accepted
357. 358
8.2
Para 1, 2nd
sentence
Te
The statement "The uniqueness rule resides in
the Namespace class as discussed above" is
inappropriate, since the rules described in 8.1.2
apply to a Namespace, not a Naming Convention.
For this part, add text allowing a uniqueness rule
to be specified for a Naming Convention, even
though there is no place to store it in the registry
specified by Part 3. WG2 should consider an
amendment to part 3 to add a uniqueness rule on
a Naming Convention.
accepted
451, 452
9.7
All
Te
The current text relates to uniqueness of names
within a Namespace. Use of a Naming
Convention may lead to potential clashes for
names of similar items. A naming convention can
enable uniqueness of names by specifying one or
more rules to be used when a potential name
clash is detected.
Add some text to this effect, with examples of
such rules (e.g. using a suffix or other qualifier to
make a name unique.)
accepted
All
All
Te
If any further problems are discovered before or
during the Ballot Resolution Meeting, and a
consensus can be reached on a solution, then
they should be corrected.
To be determined at the BRM as required.
END
The line numbers used above reference the attached version of the text. We added line numbers to make the references more precise.
32N2280T-text_for_
ballot-CD2_11179-5_w_line#s.pdf
1
2
MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
page 3 of 16
ISO/IEC electronic balloting commenting template/version 2012-03
ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5 Naming and identification principles
MB/
NC1
Line
number
Clause/
Subclause
(e.g. 17)
(e.g. 3.1)
Type of
comment2
Comments
Document: 32N2280T
Proposed change
Project: MDR-5
Observations of the
secretariat
4
ED
Duplicate Line 265 - 275
Remove line 276 – 287.
resolved - two subclauses
will be added to make the
differing levels of
conformance explicit.
9.1
ED
“rules may be recorded” is inconsistent with the
Conformance clause (4). It says “…shall have its
rules documented.
Change to “rules shall be recorded”
resolved - text will be
added to clause 9.1 to
clarify
Semantic
Rules c.
ED
Japanese translation of Total Amount is
incorrect.
“総計” should be “合計金額”.
accepted
Annex B
Semantic
Rules g.
ED
Japanese translation of Amount is incorrect.
“計” should be “金額”
accepted
935
Annex B
Syntactic
Rules d.
ED
Japanese translation of Cost Budget Period Total
Amount is incorrect.
“経費予算期間総計 or 経費・予算期間・総計”
should be “経費予算期間金額合計 or
経費・予算期間・金額合計”
accepted
952
Annex B
Lexical
Rules d.
ED
Japanese translation of Cost Budget Period Total
Amount is incorrect.
“経費予算期間総計 or 経費・予算期間・総計”
should be “経費予算期間金額合計 or
経費・予算期間・金額合計”
accepted
JP
01
276
JP
02
378
JP
03
900
Annex B
JP
04
920
JP
05
JP
06
-
-
1
2
Paragraph/
Figure/
Table/
(e.g. Table 1)
Date: 2013/4/12
287
379
MB = Member body / NC = National Committee (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
page 1 of 16
ISO/IEC/CEN/CENELEC electronic balloting commenting template/version 2012-03
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
GB 01
General
ed
There are a number of instances where "Error! Reference
source not found" appears on our copy, for example in
headers and footers and the main title.
Sort out automatic referencing.
This is an artifact of the pdf
conversion. The editor will
make a good-faith attempt to
correct it.
GB 02
Forward
ed
The list of parts of 11179 might be incorrect as the future
of Parts 2 and 4 are still to be agreed.
Amend as necessary.
resolved - the text will be
amended as the parts
evolve.
GB 03
Introduction
ed
The opening sentence could be more explicit.
Amend to read "This part of ISO/IEC 11179
contains both principles and rules."
accepted
GB 04
1 (Scope)
ed
The derivation of the terms concept, data element
concept, etc originate.
Add "defined in part 3 of this International
Standard" after "the following items."
accepted
GB 05
3 (Terms
and
definitions)
ed
It is not necessary to include 3.1, 3.4, 3.5, 3.8, 3.10 and
3.21 since these are all copied from 11179-3 and the text
of clause 3 says that the terms and definitions in other
parts of11179 all apply. However, it could be argued that
they make this part more readable as a stand-alone
document by their inclusion.
Consider removing these definitions.
resolved - the definitions will
be left as they are.
GB 06
3.1
te
Registered item is not defined.
If this definition is to be kept, add a definition of
registered item.
accepted
GB 07
3.12
te
Is this an appropriate definition of object for this
standard? Would a definition that is more closely aligned
with an object in object oriented analysis and design be
more appropriate?
Consider revising the definition.
accepted - GB will suggest a
substitute definition.
GB 08
3.17
te
Representation class is not defined.
Add a definition of representation class.
accepted
Para 1, Line
1
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 1 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
te
The term data model is ambiguous. It sometimes means
the way that data is represented in a database (for
example, the relational data model) and at other times it
means the representation as a model of the information to
be stored in an information system for a particular
universe of discourse (for example, the XYZ Company
data model, which may be represented as an IDEF1X
model, as a UML class diagram,etc).
Disambiguate the meaning. It is assumed that the
second meaning is what is required. If so, the
term "information model" may be preferable.
accepted - "information
model" will be added to the
list of examples.
GB 09
3.23 Note
GB 10
8.1.1
Line 1
ed
There is a reference to clause 4, which is the
conformance clause of this standard. Is clause 5 the
correct reference, or is the reference to clause 4 of a
different standard?
Amend reference.
accepted
GB 11
Annex A
A.1, Line 1
ed
There is a reference to clause 8. Is clause 9 the correct
reference?
Amend reference.
accepted
GB 12
Annex A
A.5, Table
ed
On the odd numbered pages the right hand edge of the
table is missing.
Adjust table.
This is an artifact of the pdf
conversion. The editor will
make a good-faith attempt to
correct it.
GB 13
Annex A
A.5, Table,
last row
ed
There are some strange lines over the first two columns.
None provided.
accepted
GB 14
Annex B
Line 1
ed
There is a reference to clause 8. Is clause 9 the correct
reference?
Amend reference.
accepted
GB 15
Annex B
ed
The Korean characters have not printed on the pdf copy
provided.
None provided.
The editor will investigate this
issue and attempt to resolve
it.
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 2 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
US01
Intro
2nd para
ed
The paragraph seems out of place and does not
make sense.
Re-write the 2nd paragraph as “A naming
convention may be based on principles. In
addition, it may contain formal and informal inputs,
such as guidelines, recommendations, company
policies, programming conventions, specifications,
procedures, and so on.” Combine paragraphs 2
and 3 by inserting re-written 2nd paragraph after
the 2nd sentence of the 3rd paragraph.
accepted
US02
Intro
3rd para
te
“names (signs or combinations of signs)” is
inconsistent with the rest of the document. It is
not correct given that the term name is a
synonym for designation.
3rd para – Remove parenthetical phrase.
not accepted - did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US03
Intro
6th para; 1st
sentence
ed
Use of the word “rigor” seems harsh.
Use “detail and enforcement” instead.
not accepted -did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US04
Intro
7th para
ed
First 2 sentences are confusing. It is not clear
what “designation in reference to most
metamodel items” means.
Re-write the sentences as follows:
not accepted- did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US05
Intro
7th para; last
sentence
te
In the last sentence, the term name as defined in
Part 5 is not synonymous with designation as
defined in Part 3.
Instead, re-write the last sentence as “This Part
will continue to use the term name for constructs
that, for purposes of this Part, are linguistic
designations. Some designations, such as codes,
are not linguistic.”
not accepted- did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US06
1
1st para; 1st
sentence
te
Use of the word instruction is confusing. This
Part provides principles for constructing names,
codes, and identifiers.
Recommend replacing first sentence with –
not accepted- this comment
inconsistent with CA02
“In this international standard the use of the root
name in the classes Namespace and Naming
Convention should be interpreted broadly and not
necessarily restricted to names.”
This Part of ISO/IEC 11179 provides principles for
constructing names, codes, and identifiers. The
principles give guidance on the formulation of
rules that constitute a naming convention.
Names, codes, and identifiers are the output of
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 1 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
naming conventions. Names for the following
items in 11179-3 may be generated by a naming
convention: concept, data element concept,
conceptual domain, data element, and value
domain.
US07
1
1st para, 3rd
sentence
ed
The text shifts to MDR in particular.
Start a new paragraph at the beginning of the 3rd
sentence.
accepted
US08
1
2nd para, 2nd
sentence
te
The words “can apply” are unnecessarily timid.
The principles do apply.
Remove “can”.
accepted
US09
1
5th para; 1st
sentence
ed
Reference to designations refers to Part 3, not
Part 5. Suggest sticking with names.
Replace designations with names.
not accepted- did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US10
3.8
Note
te
Name as defined subsumes both term and
appellation as defined in 1087-1.
Add a Note as follows:
not accepted- did not gain
consensus support of the
working group
US11
3.11
Since naming conventions have names, codes,
and identifiers as output, then the definition
should change. Then, this new definition is
slightly altered from the one in Part 3.p
Replace definition with –
definition
te
Note: Term and appellation as defined in ISO
1087-1 are both kinds of name.
specification of how signs denoting names, codes,
and identifiers are formulated
not accepted- this comment
inconsistent with CA02
Add Note –
Note: This definition is slightly generalized from
the one in ISO/IEC 11179-3. This reflects the fact
that ISO/IEC 11179-5 has scope beyond MDR.
US12
3.21
definition
ed
“textural” is a misspelling.
Change “textural” to textual”.
accepted
US13
3.21
definition
te
The definition uses the opening words “textual
string or symbol”. This can be generalized and
Substitute “perceivable object” for “textual string or
symbol”. Then add
not accepted- did not gain
consensus support of the
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 2 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
US 14
3
US15
3
new
te
made stronger, even though it changes the
definition as it appears in Part 3.
Note: The definition in Part 3 is a specialization of
this definition. This is a stronger and much more
general statement, yet it leaves the older definition
in Part 3 still valid. Now an icon or a volt is a sign
by this definition.
working group
Need definition for the term identifier.
Identifier
not accepted- this comment
inconsistent with CA02
representation of an object by a sign which
denotes it and which is intended for dereferencing
the object denoted
new
te
Need definition for the term code.
Code
collection of rules that maps the elements of one
set on to the elements of another (ISO/IEC
9789:1994)
not accepted -this
comment inconsistent with
CA02
Note: In ISO/IEC 9789:1994,
-
first set is the coded set and the second
set is the code element set
-
the relationship cardinality from the code
element set to the coded set is one-tomany.
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 3 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
US16
4
all
te
Scope section (2nd para) states broad
applicability, yet conformity is only about a
registry.
Add conformity statements as follows:
A system containing a set of designatable items
associated with a namespace which conform to
naming conventions so that:

each item shall be named in accordance
with a naming convention,

each naming convention shall have its
scope documented,

each naming convention shall have its
authority documented,

each naming convention should have its
semantic rules documented,

each naming convention should have its
syntactic rules documented,

each naming convention should have its
lexical rules documented, and

each naming convention should have its
uniqueness rules documented,
accepted, but the language
will be made consistent
with CA 10-13
then that namespace is in conformance with this
part of 11179.
A system in which every namespace conforms to
this part of 11179 shall be a conforming system.
A system containing a set of designatable items
associated with a namespace which conform to
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 4 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
naming conventions so that:

each item shall be named in accordance
with a naming convention,

each naming convention shall have its
scope documented,

each naming convention shall have its
authority documented,

each naming convention shall have its
semantic rules documented,

each naming convention shall have its
syntactic rules documented,

each naming convention shall have its
lexical rules documented, and

each naming convention shall have its
uniqueness rules documented,
then that namespace is in strict conformance with
this part of 11179.
A system in which every namespace strictly
conforms to this part of 11179 shall be a strictly
conforming system.
US17
7, 9
throughout
te
Names, codes, and identifiers are the output of a
naming convention.
Substitute the words “names, codes, and
identifiers” for each instance of the word name in
the clauses.
not accepted - this
comment inconsistent with
CA02
US18
8.1.2
2nd and 3rd
paras
ed
2nd paragraph is disallowing synonyms if the
switch is set to yes.
Add sentence to end of each paragraph alerting
the reader by using these terms.
accepted
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 5 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
3rd paragraph is disallowing homonyms if the
switch is set to yes.
US19
8.2
1st para
te
The relationship between a Namespace and a
Naming Convention in 11179-3 Ed3 is many-tomany. So, the uniqueness rule in each of the
Namespaces that relate to a particular Naming
Convention may differ. Therefore, uniqueness for
a Naming Convention is not well-defined if we
rely on expressing that in Namespace..
Replace text in clause 8.2 with
The Naming Convention class in Edition 3 of
ISO/IEC 11179-3 provides a location in the
metamodel for recording most of the rules for any
particular naming convention.
CA 18 addresses this
issue. The editor will
change this clause to agree
with the sense of both MB's
comments.
The rules contained in the Naming Convention
class are:
- scope rule
- authority rule
- semantic rule
- syntactic rule
- lexical rule
These are all of the type Text and are meant to
allow as much complexity in description as needed
to describe each rule.
See sub-clause 9.7 for a discussion of the
uniqueness rules.
US20
9.7
all
te
The discussion of the Uniqueness Principle and
the rules it may direct is too sparse. Uniqueness
for a Naming Convention is not specified through
Namespaces.
Add wording that describes what uniqueness rules
provide. Uniqueness rules in a naming convention
cannot guarantee uniqueness in a namespace,
because several naming conventions may apply to
the names there. But, a naming convention can
enable uniqueness there through its application.
CA 19 addresses this
issue. The editor will
change this clause to agree
with the sense of both MB's
comments.
US21
Annex B
new
ed
Need example of naming convention that
produces identifiers as informative annex, similar
to Annex A.
US will provide the example in new Annex B.
not accepted - this
comment inconsistent with
CA02
US22
Annex C
new
ed
Need example of naming convention that
produces codes as informative annex, similar to
Annex A.
US will provide the example in new Annex C.
not accepted - this
comment inconsistent with
CA02
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 6 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10
Date: 2 April 2013
Template for comments and secretariat observations
Document: ISO/IEC CD2 11179-5
1
2
(3)
4
5
(6)
(7)
MB1
Clause No./
Subclause
No./ Annex
(e.g. 3.1)
Paragraph/
Figure/Table
/Note (e.g.
Table 1)
Type
of
comment2
Comment (justification for change) by the MB
Proposed change by the MB
Secretariat observations on
each comment submitted
US23
Annexes B
and C
titles
ed
New Annexes B and C described above require
renaming old Annexes B and C.
Rename Annex B and Anne C to Annex D and
Annex E, respectively.
not accepted - this
comment inconsistent with
CA02
1 MB = Member body (enter the ISO 3166 two-letter country code, e.g. CN for China; comments from the ISO/CS editing unit are identified by **)
2 Type of comment: ge = general
te = technical
ed = editorial
NOTE
Columns 1, 2, 4, 5 are compulsory.
page 7 of 16
ISO electronic balloting commenting template/version 2001-10