RE: [office-accessibility] Requested editorial change to Appendix E in the ODF 1.1 specification

["Mary McRae" <marypmcrae@gmail.com>]

Ah, I shouldn't read my email in reverse order ;-)

Ok, I will go ahead and get the announcement out this afternoon. Yes, it's
perfectly reasonable for this change request to be submitted as part of the
public review process and later incorporated in the spec without requiring a
further public review.

Regards,

Mary 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Peter.Korn@Sun.COM [mailto:Peter.Korn@Sun.COM] 
> Sent: Thursday, July 27, 2006 12:15 PM
> To: mary.mcrae@oasis-open.org
> Cc: 'Richard Schwerdtfeger'; Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM; 
> office-accessibility@lists.oasis-open.org; 
> office@lists.oasis-open.org; 'Robert Weir'; mayue@cn.ibm.com
> Subject: Re: [office-accessibility] Requested editorial 
> change to Appendix E in the ODF 1.1 specification
> 
> Hi Mary,
> 
> The change we would like to make is a small clarification 
> change in the non-normative portion of the document - Appendix E.
> 
> Separately from Michael (who I believe has left work for the day in
> Germany) I understand that if the document doesn't go out 
> today, we miss our timeline.
> 
> I believe this change can be made within the 60 day public 
> review (as an editorial change, especially as it is non-normative).
> 
> So, I suggest you do NOT delay, but go ahead with PR this afternoon.
> 
> Rich - is this acceptable to you?
> 
> 
> Peter
> > I was about to announce the PR this afternoon ... Michael, 
> let me know 
> > if I should hold up or if you'd instead like this handled 
> as a comment 
> > submitted during the public review to be incorporated prior 
> to CS vote.
> >  
> > Mary
> >
> >     
> --------------------------------------------------------------
> ----------
> >     *From:* Richard Schwerdtfeger [mailto:schwer@us.ibm.com]
> >     *Sent:* Thursday, July 27, 2006 11:27 AM
> >     *To:* Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM
> >     *Cc:* office-accessibility@lists.oasis-open.org;
> >     office@lists.oasis-open.org; Robert Weir; Peter.Korn@Sun.COM;
> >     mayue@cn.ibm.com
> >     *Subject:* [office-accessibility] Requested editorial change to
> >     Appendix E in the ODF 1.1 specification
> >
> >     Michael,
> >
> >     The ODF Accessibility Subcommittee would like to make 
> an editorial
> >     change to the non-normative Appendix E.3 of the ODF 1.1
> >     specification.
> >
> >     Change:
> >
> >     Users importing non-OpenDocument slides that contain tables need
> >     access to the table structure via their assistive technology.
> >     Therefore tables imported into OpenDocument from another file
> >     format must have their structure preserved, and should 
> be imported
> >     as embedded spreadsheets.
> >
> >     to:
> >
> >     Users importing non-OpenDocument slides that contain tables need
> >     access to the table structure via their assistive technology.
> >     Therefore tables imported into an OpenDocument application from
> >     another file format must have their structure 
> preserved, and when
> >     saved as ODF should be saved as embedded spreadsheets.
> >
> >     The way this was previously worded was ambiguous in that Open
> >     Document applications may import powerpoint slides natively and
> >     saying that you would need to convert the document to 
> an embedded
> >     spreadsheet for a powerpoint slide would be 
> incorrect.and we would
> >     like to see this changed.
> >
> >     We would like to have this appear in the ODF 1.1 specification
> >     going out for public review next week however we do not 
> want this
> >     to hold up the 60 day review. If this cannot be done in time for
> >     the review then we will add this as part of the review comments.
> >
> >     Rich
> >
> >
> >     Rich Schwerdtfeger
> >     Distinguished Engineer, SWG Accessibility Architect/Strategist
> >     Chair, IBM Accessibility Architecture Review Board
> >     blog: http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/page/schwer
> >
>