Re: [office-collab] Possible posting

["C. Boemann" <cbo@boemann.dk>]

On Thursday 26 April 2012 13:37:42 Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Camilla/Thorsten,
>  
> Thinking if we can get user requirements (I know mine, may not be
> everyone's) from implementers, this may be another step towards seamless
> interchange of formats.
Yes that would be really needed, and I will submit my experience too. I've 
used CT as a user in some other (non IT) committee work with other real users.
 
> After all, what we want is not to dictate processing but the
> documentation of changes made so that whatever the internal model, those
> changes can be accurately reflected in the document.
Noble goal, but also unrealistic I think. Say we document nested changes, then 
all has to support that. If we don't document it then those that do support 
that will not be able to save using our standard.

It's not as simple as just some properties on a "normal tag" that can be 
preserved. Change tracking most often goes into an ad-hoc change tracking 
engine, and the tags can't be just dumbly written back in case the producer 
doesn't do CT. It could mess up the CT. There is some modifications to my 
statement, but in general things are not so easy to keep abstract.

I think that whatever we come up with it will dictate what those producers 
supporting it will have to do with their CT engine.

For that very reason I think getting user requirements is a very good idea. We 
need to think what is the use cases - both present and future, and we need to 
get this right.


best regards
Camilla Boemann