Re: [office] preferred view mode upon opening document

["Warren Turkal" <turkal@google.com>]

If we want to impose IRI across the board, that'd be ok. I was
picturing something a little simpler. Maybe any non-official
preferred-view-modes should just be prefixed with "x-" (like
unofficial email headers).

wt

On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 2:52 PM,  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote:
> As currently proposed, option 2 does not allow extensions.  Valid values
> of the manifest:preferred-view-mode attribute are the three listed in the
> proposal, and no more.
>
> If we wanted to allow additional values, and encourage uniqueness, we
> could allow IRI values as well, like "
> http://www.google.com/schemas/odf/view-mode1";.
>
> This is similar to package naming conventions in Java, where the use of
> packages like com.ibm.Foo piggybacks on the domain name registry
> uniqueness.
>
> Of course, nothing can force ODF users to do this correctly, so we can
> never enforce global uniqueness.  But we can encourage it.
>
> Doing this change would look like this:
>
>
> <define name="file-entry-attlist" combine="interleave">
> <optional>
> <attribute name="manifest:preferred-view-mode">
>            <choice>
>            <choice>
>            <value>edit</value>
>            <value>presentation-slide-show</value>
>            <value>read-only</value>
>            </choice>
>                           <ref name="anyURI"/>
>                    </choice>
> </attribute>
> </optional>
> </define>
>
> But do we want to go down that path?  This solution, although I've seen it
> used in other standards, is not used in ODF anywhere else, to my
> knowledge, although the issues of extensibility and namespace collisions
> are universal.  I dislike introducing a new design pattern, and have it be
> used in only one place.  "Creeping elegance" is the term that comes to
> mind.
>
> Other ways of handling this might be:
>
> 1) Apply this technique throughout ODF, wherever we currently have a fixed
> enumeration and we wish to allow additional custom choices.
>
> 2) Don't add the IRI support to the schema, but in some introductory
> material, specify that any identifiers used in extensions "should" or
> "shall" be based on IRI's in order to encourage global uniqueness.
>
> Regards,
>
> -Rob
>
>
> "Warren Turkal" <turkal@google.com> wrote on 10/23/2008 12:07:02 PM:
>
>>
>> We should have a policy for naming custom views so that applications
>> can innovate in that space. I don't think that the proposal should be
>> approved until we have defined a method for someone to make a custom
>> view without spraying all over a global namespace.
>>
>> wt
>>
>> 2008/10/22 Ming Fei Jia <jiamingf@cn.ibm.com>:
>> > Dear TC members,
>> >
>> > This is a proposal submitted many days ago. Here is the proposal link
>> > (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/office/proposal%3Aauto-
>> play_presentation_file_format).
>> >
>> > After several rounds of TC discussion, this time I updated in 2 minor
>> > places: (1)change the proposal name from "auto-play presentation file
>> > format" to "preferred view mode upon opening document" since the
> latter is
>> > more suitable for the proposal meaning as all TC members preferred the
>> > extended option;(2) rename one of preferred view modes from
> "slide-show" to
>> > "presentation-slide-show" according to Warren's suggestion.
>> >
>> > If no substantial comments for this proposal, I would like to vote on
> the
>> > next TC call. Thanks.
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
>
>