Re: [office-collab] WD04 comments [3 Thorsten]

[Thorsten Behrens <tbehrens@suse.com>]

Robin LaFontaine wrote:
>>    Conversely, with my TC hat on, I'd rather send it back to the SC, and have
>> us finish up the many open ends (yes, that implies a note to self ;)).
> 
> Please let us know what you need regarding the second point.
> 
Hi Robin, all,

this slightly overlaps with Andreas' answer, but anyway:

 * whole section 1.1 looks incomplete

 * page 13, last paragraph (the one that mentions ODF may need
   adaptions) - have a jira issue filed with some details and linked
   there - it is tedious for outsiders to hunt that down otherwise,
   and may favour a different approach

 * page 15, last paragraph - I agree with Andreas that this is
   probably not entirely capturing reality

 * page 16, revision vs. edit tracking - I don't agree with the
   conclusion there. This is a best glossed-over.

 * page 17, validation: what's the algorithmic complexity of the
   XSLT script extracting one version - are we running into
   quadratic-or-worse cases here?

 * 9.1 - that's something this SC (or the TC) should decide -
   proposal: define a minimal milestone, but don't exclude wider
   scope apriori
 * 9.2 - nonsense - it was already assessed that both proposals
   break backward compat?
 * 9.3 - rephrase - "take GCT or ECT?" - or drop the question
 * 9.4 - drop, or finish page 9, 3rd paragraph - "The mechanism for
   this is outlined in
   the proposal (the way that the host  schema would be changed to
   include change tracking) but the details of this would need further
   work."
 * 9.5 - see above. Change tracking has a very well-defined meaning
   in existing odf processing apps
 * 9.6 - why the heck is the *TC* asking *that* question to the
   general public?
 * 9.7 - lost on me. That would need outlining the advantages,
   probably - or it's a red herring
 * 9.9 - the implications of that question are all but clear to the
   casual reader. Expect no informed answer.

Please also note that my fundamental objection to approve this,
without giving further room to the OT collab proposals, still
stands.

With best regards,

-- 

Thorsten Behrens

SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg; GF: Jeff
Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)

Attachment: pgpZiVB8ixwrS.pgp
Description: PGP signature