[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] proposal for ODF 1.2: extension of verticalrelationvalues for certain anchor types
Hi Patrick, Patrick Durusau wrote: > Oliver, > > I am trying to catch up on various threads, a question below: > > Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software Engineer - Sun Microsystems wrote: > <snip> >> But regardless of my proposal and as you already stated, we have the >> problem that the current ODF 1.0/1.1 specification does not define, how >> an application should react, when a disallowed combination of vertical >> relation and anchor type occurs in a document. The other problem we have >> is that there exist already released ODF 1.0/1.1 supporting >> applications, which based on the above mentioned undefined behavior. >> Each of the Florian's above given behaviors and even more ones can >> already been implemented. >> Thus, I have problems in defining the behavior of an ODF 1.0/1.1 >> supporting application, when it imports an ODF 1.2 document containing >> one of my proposed new combinations of vertical relation and anchor type. >> >> I think we have no chance to correct our error - leaving the behavior on >> disallowed vertical relation and anchor type combinations undefined - >> for ODF 1.0/1.1 supporting applications, especially when these >> applications are already released. That is the reason why I only made >> assumptions about it. >> What we can do - and at the beginning I already stated that it seems to >> me a valid request - is to correct this error for ODF 1.2 supporting >> applications. But, I think this is not in the scope of my proposal, >> which is a feature proposal. The correction should be handled in a >> different proposal - a correction proposal - in order to have the >> possibility to discuss/vote on these things separately. >> > Here is where I jump the track. I have: > > 1) Your post on extending vertical relation values for certain anchor > types (1 July 2008) My post from 2008-07-01 is a reply on my original proposal from 2008-06-02. My post from 2008-07-01 contains some comments on the backward compatibility of the original proposal. > > 2) Florian responds (3 July 2008) asking about "old ODF processing > entities" Yes. > > 3) You respond as above suggesting "something" is a valid request. > > 4) Following #3, Florian further responds with a question about > invalid/unknown values for known elements/attributes. > > What I am missing is the "second" proposal that you see in Florian's post. Currently, no formal proposal exist for this. > > Do you mean the request that we somehow codify the treatment of values > that we did not previously define? Yes. > > While that may appear to make sense, I am not sure how that is different > from defining the "next" version of the standard. > > In other words, if previously we did not define the vertical relation > values you propose, we can say in ODF 1.2 (as a separate proposal) that > if a document doesn't have these values, we define default values to be > applied. Assume we are talking about an ODF 1.0/1.1 document. I am not sure about your previous paragraph. I am fine with it except the last sentence - I did not get its relation to the rest of the paragraph. Can you please explain again, what you mean? Thx. > > An application claim conformance to ODF 1.2 in that respect. > > However, note that I don't think it is possible for us to re-define what > it would mean to be a conforming ODF 1.0/1.1 application. Whatever > conformance we defined in those versions of the standards is fixed and > cannot be changed. I agree. > > I suppose, just to be complete, that someone could separately define a > profile for ODF applications that relies in part on one of the ODF > standards and says that in addition to supporting parts 1 - * of the ODF > standard, an application shall, ....., and define additional > requirements for things that ODF does not define. I can easily imagine > vertical industries that create metadata vocabularies, such as for > medical intake forms, etc., creating such profiles. Which would enable > them to require the use of ODF and some specified metadata vocabulary. > Or to use it in some particular way. > > The important thing to note is that would not be the ODF TC per se > making that declaration. > > Hope you are having a great day! > > Patrick > Regards, Oliver. -- ======================================================================= Sun Microsystems GmbH Oliver-Rainer Wittmann Nagelsweg 55 Software Engineer - OpenOffice.org/StarOffice 20097 Hamburg Germany Fax: (+49 40) 23 646 550 http://www.sun.de mailto:oliver-rainer.wittmann@sun.com ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1, D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028 Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering ======================================================================= Oliver-Rainer Wittmann (od) - OpenOffice.org Writer OpenOffice.org Engineering at Sun: http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]