RE: [office] ODF 1.2 Version Significance Proposal

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

I have been careless in having a reviewable version of my proposal on ODF 1.2 Version Significance available in advance of the January 5 coordination call.  I also broke my promise to have this proposal "in a complete form, and under discussion on the list, by January 1, 2009."

PROPOSED CONTINUATION ON THE PROPOSAL

The proposal has been updated with complete text for the description of "office:version":
http://wiki.oasis-open.org/office/ODF_1.2_Version_Significance
The proposed text is also included below (in wikiText).
  
I recommend that this proposal be discussed on the list between now and the January 12 call.  Discussion on January 5 is welcome, but I accept that most participants will have not had an opportunity to give the proposal much consideration at that time.

I do not propose to deal with "manifest:version" here.  We can look at that, if necessary, as part of reviewing Part 3 of the ODF 1.2 specification.  

PROPOSED TEXT

== Requested changes to the ODF Standard ==

{{{ This version of the proposal does not address the manifest:version attribute.  This should be dealt with separately. }}}

Replace the text in section 18.588 of OpenDocument-v1.2-draft7-13.odt with the following text:

=== 18.588 The office:version attribute ===

The office:version attribute is required for each and every <office:document>, <office:content>, <office:document-styles>, <office:document-meta>, and <office:document-settings> element in the XML documents that comprise an ODF 1.2 document.  The value of the attribute must be "1.2" in those occurrences.

An ODF 1.2 document, notwithstanding occurrences of office:version="1.2", CAN also be acceptable as a document of a previous ODF version when only ODF 1.2-compatible features of the earlier version are relied upon for the ODF 1.2 document.  The treatment of such documents by processors designed to implement earlier versions of ODF is implementation-specific and is not subject to ODF 1.2 conformance requirements.

When an office:version-requiring element has office:version="1.1" the element and its content are based on the OpenDocument v1.1 specification [ODF11].  For office:version="1.0" the element and its content are based on the OpenDocument v1.0 specification [ODF10].  When an office:version-requiring element has office:version omitted, the element is based on a version of the OpenDocument specification earlier than ODF 1.2.  Any treatment of these cases in accordance with the earlier ODF specifications by an implementation that supports ODF 1.2 is implementation-specific.

When an office:version-requiring element has an office:version attribute with value other than one of "1.0", "1.1", and "1.2", the element and its content are based on an OpenDocument specification later than ODF 1.2.  Any treatment in accordance with such specifications by an implementation that supports ODF 1.2 is implementation-specific.

In any case where an apparent ODF document is not specifically an ODF 1.2 document based on the required occurrences of office:version attributes, an ODF 1.2 implementation MAY process the document as if it is an ODF 1.2 document:
  * In doing so, the implementation SHOULD behave as if the requisite office:version="1.2" attributes are present. 
  * Any elements and attributes based on earlier versions of ODF that are incompatible with the corresponding ODF 1.2 features NEED NOT be accepted.  If the incompatible form is accepted, it SHALL be accepted as if cast into an equivalent but ODF 1.2-compatible substitute form.
  * Any elements and attributes that are not defined for ODF 1.2, even though occurring in XML namespaces defined for use in ODF 1.2 documents, SHOULD be treated in accordance with the rules for foreign elements and attributes. 

== Schema changes/additions: ==

The current schema has office:version="1.2" be an office-document-common-attrs non-optional attribute with required value.  This proposal makes no change to the schema.



-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200812/msg00077.html
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 22:54
To: 'ODF TC List'
Subject: RE: [office] Formal Request: ODF 1.2 Version Significance Proposal

My promise is to have this proposal in a complete form, and under discussion on the list, by January 1, 2009.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200812/msg00076.html
Sent: Tuesday, December 09, 2008 22:44
To: ODF TC List
Subject: [office] Formal Request: ODF 1.2 Version Significance Proposal

I formally request consideration of the proposal "ODF 1.2 Version Significance" for ODF 1.2.

The new-proposal document with an incomplete sketch is on the wiki at
http://wiki.oasis-open.org/office/ODF_1.2_Version_Significance

The Brief description of the proposal is:

Provide a tightened definition of version-number significance in ODF documents that is backward compatible, precise, and anticipates  further versions.

 - Dennis

Dennis E. Hamilton
------------------
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System Interoperability 
mailto:Dennis.Hamilton@acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ http://nfoWorks.org 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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 


---------------------------------------------------------------------
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