Re: [office] FO properties

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Michael,

I am checking all the responses I have gotten over the last couple of 
months to make sure I have incorporated or responded to all suggestions 
for the pre-Christmas draft.

The division into formatting properties versus others will not make it 
in that draft. :-(

However, so I can get a good run at it for next the draft after that, 
are there any "formatting" properties aside from those of SVG and FO? I 
have a sense there are but I don't think we have every enumerated them. 
Are any of the style properties "formatting" properties?|
|

I sense not because we do have some forms of inheritance for styles but 
not for SVG and FO properties.

Hope you are having a great weekend!

Patrick

Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
> Hi,
>
> On 11/08/08 20:56, Patrick Durusau wrote:
>> Greetings!
>>
>> I am working on incorporating the rest of the Sun team and other 
>> comments into the next draft.
>>
>> One item of particular concern is that we don't generally support the 
>> value "inherit" for any FO attributes.
>
> That is not specific to FO attributes. This also applies to those SVG 
> attributes that are "properties" in SVG terminology. Most of them do 
> also support a value "inherit" that ODF does not support.
>>
>> Whether we should or not in some future release is not of present 
>> concern.
>>
>> What is of concern is whether we should place all FO attributes in a 
>> separate section so we can make general statements about all FO 
>> attributes and not have to repeat where we don't support values, like 
>> inherit for any FO attribute.
>
> My suggestion would be to move all ODF formatting properties into 
> separate section. We may then add a general statement about FO and SVG 
> formatting properties, but the specification also gets clearer 
> regarding what is a formatting property, and what is an attribute to 
> an element.
>
> Best regards
>
> Michael
>
>
>>
>> There are other values that we don't support for particular values 
>> but those will be noted on those particular attributes.
>>
>> I can't think of another value that we systematically don't support 
>> for FO attributes but I would like to avoid having to repeat that we 
>> don't support inherit time after time on attributes.
>>
>> Realize this will change the section numbers from the current draft 
>> but I would rather do that now than after we have a public draft out 
>> for review.
>>
>> My leaning is towards simply biting the bullet and doing the section 
>> for all FO attributes but I don't have to do it now while TC members 
>> are reviewing it. I can do that right before we send out a version 
>> for public review.
>>
>> Thoughts/suggestions?
>>
>> Hope everyone is having a great weekend!
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>
>

-- 
Patrick Durusau 
patrick@durusau.net 
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) 
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)