RE: [office] Re: Spreadsheet Formula Conformance - Please Not Now

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

Rob,

I don't dispute the need to tie together the conformance interdependencies
of the parts of the ODF 1.2 specification.  I dispute the need to do that
now using normative pretend language appealing to other normative pretend
language that has not been written yet.  I find this particular approach to
"bootstrapping" makes us appear to be careless (or worse), leaving us with
defects that we have to remember to watch over and deal with in future
stages.  I would rather not do that.

Modifying the section on table:formula is unnecessary at this point, and it
will require its own deliberation when the time comes.  Attempting to
address it now is wasted effort and a distraction, in my opinion.  Also, the
new-born (February 5) proposed addition isn't a sufficient way to establish
the desired conformance and I don't think we should figure out how to repair
that as part of the current proposal.  I note these deficiencies: there
being no schema for table:formula in anything like the usual sense, the
addition being inconsistent with other parts of the same section, the
statement mentioning a conformance target that does not exist in normative
language of the very same conformance proposal, and asserting dependencies
on normative provisions of the OpenFormula specification that do not exist
at this point.  That's in addition to (1) the addition instructions being
incomplete and naming the wrong specification section along with (2) no
consideration of the use of table:formula within <table:table> elements that
are not descendants of an <office:spreadsheet> element.

I think the modifications for connecting up and reconciling all of the
conformance clauses should be done when those other conformance clauses are
also in evidence and we can gather up their dependencies and implications to
see what we are actually accomplishing.  I think that will be substantial
work and will require careful deliberation to achieve consensus.  The mutual
reconciliation can be worked out, "in conference" among the parts, as it
were.  

I would very much prefer a highlighted placeholder over insertion of model
language having no referents.  That strikes me as the appropriate way to
demonstrate care in bootstrapping.

 - Dennis

PS: I applaud the OpenFormula SC for having ODF 1.2 Part 2 provide a
spreadsheet formula specification that is not specific to ODF and is
adaptable in other situations where standard spreadsheet formulas are
desirable.  It may therefore be necessary to do some work to profile
OpenFormula with regard to table:formula in Part 1 (just as Part 2 currently
makes some profiling demands on ODF 1.2 Part 1), keeping in mind the
different opportunities for table:formula usage in an ODF Document.  The
normative language of OpenFormula will probably need to be adjusted so that
the intended conformance for hosting in ODF 1.2 is easy to establish. Until
we understand that reconciliation, I don't think we can say anything beyond
providing highlighted notes with our non-normative expressions of intension.

-----Original Message-----
From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200902/msg00095.html
Sent: Sunday, February 08, 2009 09:41
To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [office] Re: Spreadsheet Formula Conformance - Please Not Now
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200902/msg00095.html
"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 02/07/2009 
01:14:16 PM:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200902/msg00090.html
[ ... ]
> 
> I strongly recommend that we subdivide the table:formula conformance
> proposal out of the overall Conformance Proposal.  I think it is better 
to
> handle this when we know what conformance clauses in the OpenFormula
> document we are appealing to, and what their names are. 
> 


We need somehow to formally invoke the various "parts" of ODF 1.2 and how 
the conformance of the parts related to the conformance of the whole. This 
is similar to invoking an external normative reference, e.g., we say that 
a conformant ODF 1.2 document must be well-formed, as defined by W3C's XML 
standard.  Similarly, we need to connect the dots with regards to formula 
and package conformance.  We should at least have some boilerplate 
language that connects Part I with the other two parts in terms of 
conformance.  If we have a formula and a package part and don't invoke 
them from the main part's conformance clause, then these other parts mean 
absolutely nothing.

Remember, nothing is approved until we have our final vote to make any 
Draft into a Committee Specification, and even then we are able to change 
things in response to public comments before sending the CS on for OASIS 
membership approval.  Until then we'll need to do some bootstrapping, 
since the parts are progressing at different rates. 

-Rob

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