[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Inversed MCT
Am 21.07.2012 03:17, schrieb Andreas J. Guelzow: >> How do the different approaches satisfy inversibility needs? > > During the last year it was repeatedly stated that an ODF document with > change tracking information when read by a consumer that does not > understand the change tracking markup should appear as if all changes > had been accepted (your case B above). This seems to imply that the > document itself must always contain the final product. Indeed, so my observation was we are actually not dealing with Merge-CT but Undo-CT, its inversed twin. > Since all user actions are obviously reversible provided sufficient > information is kept I don't see how there is any huge difference between > recording an action or its inverse. Trivial example: A: "Rock Scissors Paper" op1: apply "bold face" to Rock op2: apply "bold face" to Paper op3: apply "bold face" to whole string OR op2: apply "bold face" to S op3: apply "bold face" to Scissors How to undo op3? In the world of "merge" collaboration the task is very convenient and smooth: Take saved state A and apply op1,op2. In a "merge" view complex "user centric changes" (Patrick) are no issue because you can reproduce them one by one based on the source A. With a need for inversed operations you have to translate a "user centric" op3 into what it actually changes and implement "real undo". Implementation of inversion for more complex editing operations may become a bit messy. You may end up with XML diffs even under MCT (replace X by Y operations). Best, André
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]