Re: [office-collab] Generic Change Tracking, example 6.4.2 thelatter and canonicalization of text:style-name

[monkeyiq <monkeyiq@gmail.com>]

On Sun, 2011-04-10 at 21:23 -0600, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:

> I am getting more and more confused about this generic change tracking
> proposal. I believe part of my confusion arises from the fact that
> abiword implementation details are mixed with proposed ODF
> specification. As far as I am concerned the abiword implementation
> details do not matter at all. The real question is whether the proposed
> specification allows a consumer to readily reconstruct the changes even
> if the file was written by an unknown compliant producer. 

Of course you are absolutely right that one programs implementation
details do not matter. I only include them because they are reasonably
straightforward and I'd imagine that many other tools would have to
include similar abstractions and deal with possible translations.

Without the clarifications I mention, applications who do not know each
other ("unknown compliant producer"s) can already communicate using ODT
+GCT:
http://vimeo.com/22154954
Of course, videos of more advanced use cases are planned to follow.

> 
> As far as I can tell it would be nearly impossible for an application to
> do so. Even something as simple as deleting a column in a spreadsheet
> may not be uniquely identifiable, ie. in a spreadsheet with 256 rows and
> content in the first 20 rows the deletion of B1:B100 appears to be
> recorded in the same way as deletion of B1:B265. 
> 
> Andreas 
>