ODF Teleconference notes - 8 January 2018

Please change your name from 'anonymous' using the Settings button

Jos van den Oever: Agenda
------

1. Dial-In, Roll Call, Determination of Quorum and Voting Rights

2. Motion (simple majority): Approve the Agenda

3. Motion (simple majority): Notice of minutes from prior TC calls - pending

4. Meeting time for 2017-01-08 - https://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/meetingdetails.html?year=2018&month=1&day=8&hour=17&min=0&sec=0&p1=25&p2=37

5. Issues for Jan. 8, 2018:

a. https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3897  OFFICE-3897 Extract
ODF-only features missing from SVG, liaise with W3C about that

b. https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3896  OFFICE-3896 Require
svg support for linked and inline images

6. Next meeting: 2018-01-15.

7.  Adjournment

Jos van den Oever: Michael: what is happening to the forcearray parameters?

Jos van den Oever: (this is added as initial item on the agenda)

Jos van den Oever: regina suggests reading this thread ^

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: we're discussing if we should move ahead with forcearray changes

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: the matter is not settled yet, by having an argument type of array, we know that that argument should be evaluated as an array

Jos van den Oever: Regina: the problem i see, when you calculate without array context, you get a single value, which is also an array, because of the context

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: is there an example of using an array without an array context?

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: by having it as an argument as array type, we force an array context

Patrick: Another example where ForceArray is used without Array is
MODE( { ForceArray NumberSequence N }+ )

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: andreas: do you agree that that ForceArray on NumberSequence is acceptable?

Jos van den Oever: since NumberSequence is not an array

Jos van den Oever: ForceArray makes sense if arguments are not array

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: If there is an alternative type (a choice of type), ForceArray would also be legitimate

Jos van den Oever: So only in the case when the only datatype is array, that forcearray seems redundant

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: I asked Eike but got no answer to the question

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: if there were an example like this, then forcearray would be warranted

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: i'm looking up the references, e.g. 6.13.30ROWS

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: perhaps I do not know what array context means

Regina Henschel: The LOOKUP-function have the same choice Reference|Array.

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: ROWS arguments are not evaluated in an array context.

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: what does it do differently

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: it would mean implicit intersection

Andreas J Guelzow: =C4:D5+F4:G5  in array context is a 2 by 2 array

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: in an array context it's a 2x2 array

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: you would not get anything, because you cannot have rows and columns intersection at the same time

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: so ROWS does not force an arrays context and I understand what Eike meant

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: we need something to distinguish between forcing array context and not

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: wasn't eike saying that ForceArray is supposed to do that

Jos van den Oever: Andreas: Eike is right that we need to keep ForceArray to distinguish, and it's correct that it lacks in ROWS

Jos van den Oever: Regina: we should follow eike's proposal

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: is there consensus that we need a more explicit explanation?

Jos van den Oever: Regina: we need another issue: first solve the issues where ForceArray is missing and then make an issue to add a better explanation in the specification

Jos van den Oever: Regina: i've already started to think on a better explanation, but that has to wait until after fosdem for which I'm preparing a talk

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: are there more comments on this topic? no? ok, now we have a good path forward

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: this one was submitted by Thorsten

Jos van den Oever: Regina: it sounds as a wish that we move from all draw shapes to svg

Jos van den Oever: Regina: but that seems not possible, because draw: can have a text box, svg has no wrapping

Jos van den Oever: Regina: in draw there is no fill and stroke on text

Jos van den Oever: Regina: so moving totally to svg is not a good idea

Jos van den Oever: Regina: in svg we'd have to add our own draw text as extention? is that what we want?

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: doesn't svg 2 have wrapping?

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: no, there's a recent update on it where wrapping is discussed

Jos van den Oever: Regina: they've moved their working to github, so we can look there

Jos van den Oever: Regina: There is a weekly digest to the svg mailing list. They are still working on the spec

Jos van den Oever: GitHub link: https://github.com/w3c/svgwg

Jos van den Oever: Regina: there are other differences, e.g. draw transform does not work on stroke, but svg also transforms the stroke

Jos van den Oever: Regina: in svg there is filling of non-closed shapes too

Jos van den Oever: Regina: there are many cases where our way to draw the shapes would have to go into an svg extension element

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: or we could suggest improvements to svg

Jos van den Oever: Regina: I've collected some things on the wiki of the document foundation ^

Jos van den Oever: Regina: do we really want to change our draw shapes to svg?

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: or offer it as alternative

Jos van den Oever: Jos: we already allow adding SVG images, even inline

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: the spec says that extentions should only be used if there is no alternative

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: so only use svg when draw does not support what you want

Jos van den Oever: Regina: as an external image svg is fine, inline svg is discouraged because it is an extension

Jos van den Oever: Michael: what is the advantage of inline svg?

Jos van den Oever: Michael: for compatibility we cannot lose any draw functionality

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: regina said 'use svg outside of a draw frame' what does that mean?

Jos van den Oever: Regina: one could put svg elements in odf and then it's odf extended

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: is there a difference in the content that i can have in an svg element depending on the location (in draw:frame or outside)

Jos van den Oever: Regina: SVG can have an event handler

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: we say vectors should be stored as svg, but draw:image only allows base64 content

Jos van den Oever: Patrick: we might allow inline svg there

Jos van den Oever: Regina: currently you put svg as a separate file

Jos van den Oever: Regina: base64 is only needed in flat files

office message