[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Fwd: [office-metadata] Suggested Changes on the Metadata proposal
My earlier response to Michael for more context ... Begin forwarded message: > On Jun 29, 2007, at 10:06 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - > Hamburg wrote: > >> 1. We have to make sure that the language we are choosing is precise, >> and permits reasonable edit operations on documents. Related to >> xml:ids, that means that the language must permit to remove the >> attribute or to change its values if this happens as the result of a >> user action or a machine processing the document. > > Right. > >> 2. If a document is opened and saved again, we all expect that the >> paragraph content is preserved. The same applies to tables, lists, >> images. etc. > > Does this include attributes? > >> Does the specification has a language that enforces >> that? No, it doesn't. But we all expect that these features are >> preserved anyway. >> But what's different with the xml:id (and metadata in general) that >> there is the assumption that it may get removed unless there is a >> language that forbids that? > > The bottomline is, because we move so much of the RDF logic into the > package, the xml:id attributes become crucial anchor points. In short, > if an application removes, say, the xml:id from a text:meta-field or > otherwise causes the URI binding to be invalid, the field will break. > It would be bad for interoperability for applications to do this. > > ... > >> 3. The focus of ODF of course are office documents. But there always >> was the assumption that also other kind of applications should be >> able to use ODF. So, if someone develops a small text editor and >> wishes to support ODF to the extend that typical text editors can, >> this should be be possible. Our language should not prohibit that. We >> should also not forget the various ODF plug-in efforts for MS Office >> or similar ODF implementations. They have only limited control of >> what happens with certain information during complex load, edit and >> save operations within MS Office. I'm not sure if they can preserve >> all metadata and all xml:ids under all circumstances in a way that >> keeps the metadata consistent and therefore of value. > > Well, let's say an application doesn't care about metadata. All they > have to do is preserve the files in the package and the xml:ids as is. > They need not do any kind of processing. > > I don't see how this is any real burden (?). > >> Having that said, here are my suggestions. Please do not consider >> them as a proposal. They are only suggestions, and the SC may follow >> them as a whole or partially, or may not. >> >> 1. We may move all the metadata related should/shall language into >> the general conformance section. This has the advantage that it is >> not overlooked as easy as it would be if it is in the element and >> attribute description. It further has the advantage that metadata is >> mentioned at a very prominent position. >> 2. We may introduce the term of a metadata-aware application (or >> something like that), and define conformance definitions along the >> following lines for it: > > I think the rules should apply to all ODF 1.2 compliant applications. > Carving out a separate category of "metadata aware" leaves a large > loophole. > > On that basis, perhaps option 1 is preferable, where the language > remains "shall." I'd go even further, n fact, and require preservation > of all attributes. That makes it a generic requirement that is not > specific to metadata, but ensures xml:id preservation. > > Bruce > >> - A metadata aware ODF implementation *shall* not remove the xml:id >> attributes defined in sections [?] or change its values unless the >> removal or modification is the result of an edit operation caused be >> the user, or a similar action taken by some automatic processing of >> the document. >> - [any other requirement that may exist] >> 3. We may rephrase the above statement for general ODF >> implementation, replacing the *shall* with a *should*: >> - An ODF implementation *should* not remove the xml:id attributes >> defined in sections [?] or change its values unless the removal or >> modification is the result of an edit operation caused be the user, >> or a similar action taken by some automatic processing of the >> document. >> 4. Some time ago we have discussed whether the question which >> implementation should/shall support what features may be a topic for >> ODF 1.3. So we may go with no or only a very limited number of >> metadata related conformance requirements for ODF 1.2, and make a >> deeper discussion part of a more general discussion for ODF 1.3. >> >> Maybe these comments and suggestions are somehow useful. >> >> Best regards >> >> Michael >> >> >> Bruce D'Arcus wrote: >>> Svante, >>> I suggest these go to the main TC list. This one, in particular ... >>> On 6/27/07, Svante Schubert <Svante.Schubert@sun.com> wrote: >>>> VIII) Adjust 'shall' requirement to 'should' for xml:id >>>> >>>> "All implementations SHALL preserve any xml:id attribute and its >>>> value >>>> when present on any of the elements listed in 1.4.3." >>>> >>>> Similar as other standards (e.g. CSS) we should not try to force >>>> features by specification, but should let the market sort this out. >>>> Moreover the specification could be interpreted that it is even >>>> forbidding to delete the xml:id or its value, even when deleting the >>>> content, therefore a 'SHOULD' is sufficient. >>> ... has major implications. I'm not at all willing to accept this >>> without some serious discussion with the entire TC. >>> Bruce >> >> >> -- >> Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering >> StarOffice/OpenOffice.org >> Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55 >> D-20097 Hamburg, Germany michael.brauer@sun.com >> http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500 >> http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS >> >> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, >> D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten >> Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 >> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Marcel Schneider, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland >> Boemer >> Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering >> >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]