OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-collab message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Generic CT proposal: Possible bug relating to text:outline-level

  In example 6.7.2, pp15, of the generic change tracking proposal the
example uses text:outline-level as an example of ac:changeXXX

  The bug I see is quite small, but deserves clarification none the
less. The example uses text:p to demonstrate the use of
text:outline-level. It appears from the draft ODF 1.2 spec that
outline-level can only be applied to text:h and not text:p as the
example currently shows. For those interested, see 19.844 on pp649 of
Committee Specification Draft 07 / Public Review Draft 03 of ODF 1.2

  Using OpenOffice 3.2.0 (build 9483) from the Fedora repos, if I create
a custom style "test" and give it an outline level (right click style,
select modify, outline & numbering tab in dialog, outline level set to 3
for example) then OpenOffice will save text using that style as text:h
instead of text:p. When I reset the outline level to "body text" for my
custom style, then the paragraph is again saved using text:p.

  So should the example 6.7.2 from the generic proposal change to text:h
instead when the outline level is applied? If so it will also need the
markup from 6.13 because the element type is changing. Or should the
change an attribute example in the proposal be modified to use a more
straight forward attribute which does not need an element change too. It
might be less than optimal to add a caveat to example 6.7.2 that the
element type should change (text:p -> text:h) without showing the markup
because it makes testing implementations against the example less
straight forward.

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]