Re: [office-collab] Suggestions for moving forward to resolveissues

["Andreas J. Guelzow" <andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca>]

On Thu, 2011-04-21 at 20:26 -0600, monkeyiq wrote:
> Also, I've not contributed to the WebODF GCT implementation by Jos van
> den Oever. So this makes three independent implementations, not one as
> you posit. 

Thank you for clearing that up. (I have no idea where I got the
impression that they weren't truly independent, just that i was under
this, apparently false, impression.)
> 
> On your last point, if we try to avoid the GCT because of its ability to
> be generic and thus choose ECT and buckets, an application then needs to
> be able to generically diff ODF fragments and interpret the results to
> actually work out what the changes were in order to show them. We have
> merely swept the complexity out of one place and into another.

I don't think under the bucket proposal an application is expected to
compare the bucket contents to figure out what has changed but the
buckets were intended as indivisible units, ie. an application would
only indicate that the bucket changed.

Andreas