Re: [office-formula] Grouping functions and capabilities

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

I'm not following.  Can you give
a couple of examples?

-Rob


"David A. Wheeler" <dwheeler@dwheeler.com>
wrote on 07/01/2006 08:58:52 PM:

> The old "OpenFormula" had level 1, 2, etc., and we
> agreed that this was too constraining.  Interestingly enough,
> the folks who were most concerned (wikiCalc) has since found
> that it wasn't hard to add all the "level 1" functions,
and
> of course that aids portability.
> 
> Thus, for a start, here's what I propose:
> * For every function, instead of saying "level X", simply
>    give the function name as its (lowest-level) group.  If
>    some capabilities are at a higher level (not everyone
needs
>    to support them), then append _2, _3, etc.
> * Group the functions logically, and predefine a few levels
>    in them the same way.
> * Define something like "levels" at the end.
> 
> In the front, make it clear that an implementation need not
> implement a particular level/group, but that the levels/groups
> make it easier to explain what an implementation provides or
> what a spreadsheet needs.
> 
> --- David A. Wheeler