[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-comment] Public Comment
Dear Mr. Crowhurst, The intention behind the conformance rules in section 1.5 is to specify how the OpenDocument format can be extended. Such extensions usually would be implemented by adding a certain, well defined set of elements and attributes to the OpenDocument schema. Such extended schemas could be future OpenDocument specifications, or other schemas based on the OpenDocument schema. It is assumed that there are applications that interpret the extensions, as well as at least a subset of the OpenDocument schema. That is, the extensions actually specify certain new features. What is not the intention of section 1.5 is to specify a "custom schema" feature for office applications. A "custom schema" feature could be described as a feature that allows to add "custom" markup within an office application or some other editing environment, that has no meaning for the application itself except being there. The proposed change seems to be a proposal related to custom schema support. Caring about such "custom schema" support actually is on the agenda of the OASIS OpenDocument TC for a future version of the specification. Regarding section 1.5 itself: The Open Office TC decided to use the term MAY rather than MUST (or will) at the mentioned location, because it wanted to ensure that the OpenDocument specification can be used by as many implementations as possible. This means that the format should also be usable by applications that only support a very small subset of the specification, as long as the information that these applications store can be represented using the OpenDocument format. A requirement that all foreign elements and attributes must be preserved actually would mean that some applications may not use the format, although the format itself would be suitable. Therefor, we leave it up to the implementations, which elements and attributes of the specification they support, and whether they preserve foreign element and attributes. Some more information about this can be found in appendix D of the specification. As said above, "custom schema" features are a topic that is on the agenda of our TC for a future version of the specification. For this reason, we are very interested in information regarding the use cases of these features. Therefor, we would appreciate it if you could send us more details regarding your specific use case of custom schemas. Best regards Michael Brauer OASIS OpenDocument TC chair comment-form@oasis-open.org wrote: > Comment from: christopher.crowhurst@thomson.com > > After internal review of the specification we have the following comment "Microsoft Office 2003 includes support for foreign elements and attributes. Excel and Word will ignore and preserve these elements when opening and saving. This is useful because it means you can include proprietary markup in your Microsoft Office documents, and you can count on Excel and Word handling this markup properly (i.e., not choking on it or deleting it). The OpenDocument specification states only that "Conforming applications that read and write documents MAY preserve foreign elements and attributes." This means that conforming applications would not be required to preserve foreign elements. With respect to our e-Tool products, this might be a problem since we make use of custom proprietary markup in the Word and Excel templates we create for our customers." > > > > Can the MAY become a WILL? -- Michael Brauer Phone: +49 40 23646 500 Technical Architect Software Engineering Fax: +49 40 23646 550 StarOffice Development Sun Microsystems GmbH Sachsenfeld 4 D-20097 Hamburg, Germany e-mail: michael.brauer@sun.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]