Comments DIS 24619 Ballot

CZ 1 last te Entity ID Request Language Is not really paragrap (http://project.okkam.org/apis/entity-id- applicable. ENS is h request-language) could be mentioned about references to in the context of other standards. entities (organizations, people, …) 24619 is primarily about resources that can be accessed as a byte stream. CZ 3.1.5 ed Bad reference to archive archive (3.1.6) ok CZ 3.1.12 ed “resource part” should be given as the ok primary term, “part” as an alternative CZ 3.4.2 ed “urlify” is a technical slang expression, it No alternative, should not be used as a term widely used CZ 4 Page 6 ed The last item in the list should be ok marked CZ 4 Page 7 ed the this PID -> this PID ok CZ Bibliograp [17] te http://www.ietf.org/internet- Ok, checked all web hy drafts/draft-kunze-ark-14.txt could references again not be accessed on November 9. It is really funny in the context of the _Persistent_ ID.

JP gen Mixed up with supplementary Use some perspicuous format such A list is already explanations, the content of the as tables to identify the essential available in 5.2. Too standard itself is somewhat hard to content of the standard. much restructuring identify. would be needed to follow this advice. st JP Introducti 1 ed `able retrieve’ is ungrammatical. Correct it to `able to retrieve’. Ok on paragraph JP 1 1st ed `which are created by computational Delete it. Changed text for paragraph and applied linguists and information legibility specialists’ is unnecessary.

JP 1 2nd ed `the accessibility and resolution of Clarify it. Made a footnote paragraph parts (server-side resolution) and explaining fragments (client-side resolution)’ is unclear. Why are parts server-side and fragments client side?

JP 3.1.2 ed Accommodate this fact. Interpreted this as a request to add to resource definition. A version should be different from the However this previous one, if any. depends on the versioning policy of the resource maintainer/archive JP 3.1.8 ed Separate `incarnation’ and Further explaining Hard to comprehend. `Incarnation’ `resource collection incarnation’. could be counter must be defined’ first. productive JP 3.4.2 ed Describe how to read it. Sampa How is it pronounced? pronunciation added to URLify JP 4 Last te Replace `some research that needs Tried to generalize Collection should not be restricted to paragraph to be verifiable’ with `some later research, but should be open to any of p. 7 work’, and rewrite other parts to (possibly more practical) kind of work. accommodate non-research work. JP 5.1 ed The list 1 through 5 is not necessary, Supportive list, easy given 5.1.1 through 5.1.5. as overview

GB General Te It is not unreasonable in this draft to Every effort should be Tried to liaison in the past to refer to ISO 690-2; but that standard is made to harmonize this no avail ISO 690 is limited: to be withdrawn shortly, as the revision standard and ISO 690 • PID frameworks: we of ISO 690 (currently at DIS stage) is to since many interests are 24619 states incorporate all that is currently relevant shared. Also terms like requirements, from ISO 690-2. It will therefore not be “” and “reference” 690:2010 mentions possible to refer to it in the final version are used in common. The only DOI in an of ISO 24619 liaison between TC 37 example (but would and TC 46 should be allow any other PID exploited for this purpose. framework) • No extra records associated with a PID (more URLs, metadata, ...) • Part identifiers not mentioned Updated all referenced to ISO690-2 to reflect ISO690: 2010

PI Intro Para 2 Ed 620-2 is not listed in the normative ok D L4 references; this is probably a typo for 690-2

GB Scope Para 3 Ed 620-2 is not listed in the normative ok L3 references: this is probably a typo for 690-2

GB 3. Notes Ed The notes should be numbered extra emphasis needed to separately 1,2. The words “in the sense distinguish from use outside of this international standard” should be this work deleted from notes as this is understood from the context

GB 3.3.6 Definitio Ed The reason for underlining “computer” is ok n not understood

GB Backgrou Para 1 Ed There are said to be three types of ok nd resource, but only two are bullet pointed

GB Bibliograp General Te The entries in the bibliography should Ok, 690 followed where hy conform to ISO 690 (ISO 690 and ISO applicable 690-2). This would necessitate dating of web references at time of access. Such a change would illustrate that implementation of this standard is not incompatible with the use of ISO 690 for human-readable text.

Ge While the Canadian delegation Move to TC 46 / SC 9 Thanks for the finds this draft to be both compliment! well written, technically sound, and clearly applicable The reason it is being to work products in language initiated by TC37 is that technology, the (very fitting) we need it now to guide generality of this standard practice and service does call into question why it providers currently being is being balloted through TC created/formed in our 37 / SC 4. TC 46 / SC 9, for domain. Expertise and example, seems a far more experience with LR< is appropriate subcommittee. required

The only known work from TC46/SC9 known: ISO 690 is not a usable alternative.

3.1.1 Ed “via a URI” “with a URI” ok 3.1.2 Ed “Information about languages” “information about ok one or more languages” 3.1.13 Ed Unclear whether Change to singular, ok “representations” should be in if necessary. the plural here 3.1.17 not Ed “quasi-synonyms, for “near-synonyms, for e purposes of” the purposes of” 3.2.2 Not Ed Main text is too Combine main text with e general for note as follows: “string of substitution characters used to identify or name a resource (3.1.1) with a syntax as defined in IETF/RFC 3986.” 3.3.4 not Ed “but implemented as “but is often e different resolvers” implemented as different resolvers” 3.3.7 Ed “unified” is cross-referenced Change to 3.4.3 ok with 3.4.2 3.4.1 Not Ed “Used within in the” “When used within e the” 4 1st Ed Third bullet missing Add bullet par a 4 2nd Ed “and it is subject to “and the means of par context” referring to it is a subject to context” 4 3rd Ed “to the this PID” “to this PID” par a 4 4th Ed “and practice for “and practices for par resource part” the resource part” a 4 4th Ed “formats where “formats, where par available” available,” a 4 5th Ed “Collections of “Collections of resources par resources can be that can be maintained” a, maintained” fir st enu mer ate d 4 5th Ed “A different type of “A different type par collection is one of collection that a, that was not” was not” 2nd enu mer ate d ite m 5.1 3rd Ed “PID/URI mapping and “PID/URI mappings enu PID/metadata and PID/metadata mer association;” associations” ate d ite m 5.1 4th Ed Missing conjunction Add “and” after enu semicolon mer ? ate d ite m 5.1.4 Ed “E.g. The” “For example, the” ok 5.1.5 Ed “already a HTTP URI” “already an HTTP URI” ok 5.1.6 3rd Ed “should in addition Restate par to the PID scheme (is 5.3) Tried to a conformant PID”: no rephrase idea what this means 5.1.6 3rd Ed “viewer applications. “viewer par For example, using application. For a the Handle System as example, using the an implementation:” Handle System (HS) as an implementation:” 5.4 3rd Ed “trigger” “cause” par a 5.4 3rd Ed “However, there is a “When, however, par need” there is a need” a 5.4 3rd Ed “using a part “with a part par specification” specification” a 5.4 5th Ed “Updates of this “Updates to this par standard” standard” a 5.4.1 Ed “MPEG-21 type resources” “MPEG-21 resources” ok 5.4.2 Ed “XPointer” – what is this? Cite, define or ok explain 6.1 3rd Ed “in Web architecture” “in the Web par architecture” a A.1.1 2nd Ed “is up to the “is left to the par discretion” discretion” a A.1.1 2nd Ed “some results on the “some results as an par user’s screen” – answer to a query” a answers to SQL A.1.1 3rd Ed Misplaced punctuation Remove full stop par after “serviced” a and before end of following parenthesis. A.1.1 3rd Ed “by qualified links “by qualified par and/or in the links, and/or in a citation the citation information.” information.”

A.1.3 4th Ed “the collection of “a collection of bul the resources that resources that have let have been bundled to been bundled for store them” storage” A.1.4 1st Ed “as an incarnation of “as an incarnation par its existence and, of its existence. a for performance ... This is for reasons, to performance ... differentiate reasons; it between” differentiates between” A.1.4 2nd Ed “bundles the “bundles, the par metadata” metadata” a A.1.4 2nd Ed “how metadata “how a metadata par description” description” a A.1.4 3rd Ed Misplaced commas Change both to par semicolons in this a para. A.2 1st Ed “as sequence” “as a sequence” par a A.2 1st Ed “location These” “location. These” par [add full stop] a A.2 1st Ed “in a web document “in a web document, par the URI becomes” the URI becomes” a A.2 1st Ed “if only because when “if only because, par embedded in a web when embedded n a a document the URI” web document, the URI” A.2 1st Ed “scheme HTTP “scheme, HTTP par (IETF/RFC 2616) (IETF/RFC 2616), a supports” supports” A.2 2nd Ed “information is “information are par embedded” embedded” a A.2 Fn. Ed “separate from the “separately from 3 resource location, the resource however in reality, location. In it is very difficult” reality, however, it is very difficult” A.2 5th Ed “The namespace “The namespace- par specific string” specific string” a A.3 3rd Ed “Short introductions “Short par for” introductions to” a A.4.1 2nd Ed “specifies normative “specifies a normative par syntax” syntax” a A.4.1 2nd Ed “allows referencing” “allows for par referencing” a A.4.2 3rd Ed “via shared document” “through shared bul document” let A.4.3 1st Ed “Nor is it the “It is also not the par purpose” purpose” a A.4.3 2nd Ed “Lexicons” “Lexica” par Changed this a everywhere A.4.3 2nd Ed “amended by a “amended with a par resource-specific” resource-specific” a A.6 2nd Ed “claims to the test” “claims to a test” par a A.6 3rd Ge “using DOIs as the Explain. This is an par only form of PID, important part of a, which can be seen as the motivation for 1st too restricted, since this standard. bul other PID frameworks Otherwise, we let are acceptable from should all just the perspective...” – keep using DOIs. but why are the other Made point that PID frameworks 1) DOI is a necessary? specific policy of use of the HS (no extra metadata) 2) Also a choice for business model In the ISO 690:2010, now other PID systems are allowed, without however making further requirements A.6 3rd Ed “as in the example.” “as for example:” par a, 2nd bul let B.1 3rd Ed “is publicly “are publicly par available.” available.” a B.3 1st Ed Missing conjunct Add “and” after bul semi-colon let , 2nd sub - bul let B.4 1st Ed “ARKS” “ARK system” par a B.4 2nd Ed “it allows the “it allows for the par merging” merging” a B.4 3rd Ed “the W3C point of “the W3C point of view, par view that” that” a

DE Ge Germany disagrees for the following reason

DE first page title ge The new title unnecessarily limits the "Language resource management Other titles are still scope to language technology — Persistent identification for possible see also applications and is thereby inappropriate citation and sustainable secretariat to gain the linguistic community as a accessibility of language suggestions. group of users. This is all the more resources" Propose: problematic as the standard would be very useful in linguistics to facilitate Language resource replicability in empirical research based management – on language resources – what was also Persistent the initial motivation for proposing the Identification and work item. access

** 0 Title ed We suggest redrafting the title for clarity. Taking the content of the Our proposition is: Scope and Introduction into Language Resource consideration, check whether Management - Persistent any of the following Identification and Access proposals, or variations thereof, would be helpful to the reader: a) Language resource management — References and — Persistent identification and access in language technology applications b) Language resource management — References and citations in language technology applications — Persistent identification and access c) Language resource management — Language technology applications — Persistent identification of, and access to, references and citations d) Language resource management — Persistent identification of, and access to, references and citations in language technology applications e) Language resource management — Language technology applications — Persistent identification of, and access to, bibliographic resources ** 2 ed Normative references are "referenced Delete ISO 690-2 from Ok documents cited in the document in Clause 2. Check wording Consider 12620 normative such a way as to make them related to this reference in indispensable for the application of the A.6 to see if it needs to be document" (ISO/IEC Directives Part 2, updated. Add ISO 690 to the others deleted or moved 2004, 6.2.2). Bibliography. to bibliography

Check whether ISO 12620 ISO 690-2 is under revision as ISO 690. should really be normative. If It is only referred to in informative Annex not, move it to the A. Bibliography.

The way in which ISO 12620 is referenced Move ISO 16642 to the in 5.4.3 (the only place outside of Bibliography. informative Annex A where it is cited) is Move ISO 24613 and ISO not clearly normative. "As per ISO 30042 to the Bibliography or 12620:2009, each data category delete them. specification in the ISO TC 37 Data Category Registry (DCR) shall have its own PID" Does the user need to have a copy of ISO 12620 at hand to apply ISO 24619? If not, move the reference to the Bibliography. If so, change the wording in 5.4.3 to make this clearer.

ISO 16642 is not cited normatively. Move it to the Bibliography. ISO 24613 and ISO 30042 are not cited at all in the document outside of Clause 2. Move them to the Bibliography or delete them.

** 3.1.2 ed According to D.1.5.3 of the ISO/IEC Check the wording of the Ok, moved example into Directives Part 2, 2004, the form of a definition and move the Note definition shall be such that it can additional information to replace the term in context. Additional examples or notes. information shall be given only in the form of examples or notes. It looks like "such as...." could be moved into an Example.

** 3.11 notes ed Please number the notes. Ok.

** 5 ed Add a "5.1 General" and renumber, Ok. checking cross-references. Reason: ISO/IEC Directives Part 2, 2004, 5.2.4 (hanging paragraphs...shall be avoided).

** 5.1 ed This will become 5.2 based on the Ok. addition of "5.1 General". Add a "5.2.1 General" and renumber. Reason: ISO/IEC Directives Part 2, 2004, 5.2.4 (hanging paragraphs...shall be avoided).

** 5.4 4 ed Use a decimal comma. Ok. But not in code examples ** 5,4 5 ed The phrase "updates of this standard" is Delete this sentence? Rephrased: more for TC 37 than for the user. Updates to this standard are expected to enlarge the list of applicable resource part/fragment id formats ** A.1 ed Add an "A.1.1 General" and renumber. Ok. Reason: ISO/IEC Directives Part 2, 2004, 5.2.4 (hanging paragraphs...shall be avoided).

** A.6 ed ISO 690-2 is under revision as ISO 690. Ok. Check wording related to this reference in A.6 to see if it needs to be updated.