Re: [dita] FW: New comment on "New discussion list open on a proposed XML Change Tracking Technical Committee"

[Andrzej Zydron <azydron@xtm-intl.com>]

Title: Email signature standard

Hi JoAnn,

Thank you for this post. It is worth taking into account the ETSI LIS (ex LIA OSCAR) xml:tm standard as a starting point:

http://www.gala-global.org/oscarStandards/xml-tm/xml-tm.html

There is no point in re-inventing the wheel or competing standards.

Best Regards,

Andrzej Zydroń

---------------------------------------

CTO

XTM International Ltd.

PO Box 2167, Gerrards Cross, SL9 8XF, UK

email: azydron@xtm-intl.com              

Tel: +44 (0) 1753 480 479

Mob: +44 (0) 7966 477 181

skype: Zydron

www.xtm-intl.com

 

 

 

 

On 28/06/2012 22:11, JoAnn Hackos wrote:

Dear Friends,

Robin LaFontaine and I have begun a discussion list in the OASIS LinkedIn site about change tracking. Please consider joining in the discussion that moves toward a possible Change Tracking TC. See the link below. You’ll have to join the LinkedIn group first.

 

JoAnn

 

JoAnn T. Hackos, PhD

President

Comtech Services Inc.

710 Kipling Street, Suite 400

Denver, CO 80215

joann.hackos@comtech-serv.com

skype joannhackos

 

 

 

From: messages-noreply@bounce.linkedin.com [mailto:messages-noreply@bounce.linkedin.com] On Behalf Of OASIS
Sent: Thursday, June 28, 2012 1:15 PM
To: JoAnn Hackos
Subject: New comment on "New discussion list open on a proposed XML Change Tracking Technical Committee"

 

LinkedIn Groups

• Group: OASIS
• Discussion: New discussion list open on a proposed XML Change Tracking Technical Committee

I got it. This thread is the discussion. I thought "discussion list" meant something more specific.

I am personally indifferent to this topic in general. As a participant in the development of the ODF specifications, there is no impact with respect to an XML-level change-tracking proposal or activity and I don't know what the compelling use case is for a standardization effort at that level.

For ODF (I can't speak for DITA, and only observe that DocBook might be an interesting case too), the issue is at the semantic level of the document format, not the fact that XML is used as a medium for expressing the document structures for ODF. Change tracking at ODF is based on the perceived document, not its internal _expression_, and the limited capabilities already in the ODF specification, as much as they require work to satisfy interoperability, are oriented in that direction.

If it were thought that an XML-level document-abstraction-neutral method were expected to be achievable and incorporated in future standards for higher-level document formats, I would be very concerned. Put differently, the XML DOM is not the ODF DOM. XML is a carrier for an elaborate structural model that is not sensible when viewed as XML alone.
Posted by Dennis Hamilton

Like this comment » Comment » Stop Following Discussion »

 

 

NEW

Now you can comment by replying to this email.

 

 

You are receiving Group Discussion emails. Unsubscribe.

 

This email was intended for JoAnn Hackos. Learn why we included this. © 2012, LinkedIn Corporation. 2029 Stierlin Ct. Mountain View, CA 94043, USA