RE: [office-collab] Draft consensus report: Change Tracking on the RDF itself?

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

To clarify,

I completely agree that change-tracking in office productivity documents is about the user-perceived document as presented by a consumer.  However, it has to be implemented in the markup and I was raising limitations of the markup that would make preservation of an RDF interdependency meaningful.

 - Dennis

MORE DETAIL

If there is RDF markup about the document in some *.RDF document in the package, it refers to content via references of some form, using instances of the OWL cases provided for that purpose.  

This allows reference to material in the content.xml file (and perhaps elsewhere).  Although a producer that provides that RDF presumably does so based on some relationship between the RDF and the content.xml (using xml:id values as targets or using XPath or something), it is near impossible for a consumer to know what that interdependency is (unless it is the very same producer).  

So making modifications to the visible text of the ODF document will, if it applies to areas that are referenced by RDF elsewhere in the package, potentially break the connection.  It is not clear how change-tracking of the material changed can compensate for the fact that there is RDF that depends on the unmodified material.  There is a referential integrity issue.

Note that these issues may also arise with RDFa cross-referencing within content.xml too, just as they arise with cross references and bookmarks in material that is impacted by changes (and their change-tracking).



-----Original Message-----
From: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of Patrick Durusau
Sent: Thursday, October 20, 2011 01:39
To: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office-collab] Draft consensus report: Change Tracking on the RDF itself?

Dennis,

On 10/19/2011 11:46 PM, Dennis E. Hamilton wrote:
> Funny, I don't think an ODF producer should be required to pay attention to the RDF at all, except maybe the embedded RDFa.  But not manifest.rdf and any other *.rdf components in the package.
>
Curious what you mean by "...required to pay attention to RDF at all...." ?

Producers would be the components that produce RDF, whether in the 
manifest or RDFa.

Did you mean consumers?
> There's nothing in the ODF specification for dealing with RDF package parts in any way whatsoever.  It is a no-man's land.  Change tracking seems a very messy business, especially since it has to deal with incoming references to xml:id fragment identifiers in parts of the content.xml.  Without knowing what the semantics of the incoming reference is, it is not clear what is appropriate "change-tracking."
>
The treatment of package parts does need to be beefed up, I will find 
the time to open a series of issues for RDF in 1.3.

It also isn't clear what you mean by:

> Change tracking seems a very messy business, especially since it has to deal with incoming references to xml:id fragment identifiers in parts of the content.xml.

"incoming"? From where?

There seems to be some confusion about the nature of change tracking in 
ODF.

At least in my opinion it isn't about tracking changes in the ODF XML.

It is about tracking changes to the document instance, changes that are 
represented in XML so the next application in line knows what changes 
were made, accepted or rejected, etc.

Yes, we have to make reference to ODF elements and attributes as part of 
recording changes, because that is how the changes will be manifested to 
the next application but isn't diffing the XML as though we were editing 
the XML.

To put it another way, ODF isn't about editing XML, it is about XML 
representing an editing process and/or product for interchange. Not the 
same thing.

Hope you are at the start of a great day!

Patrick


> -----Original Message-----
> From: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org] On Behalf Of monkeyiq
> Sent: Wednesday, October 19, 2011 20:04
> To: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: [office-collab] Draft consensus report: Change Tracking on the RDF itself?
>
> Hi,
>    One area which after initial discussion there seems to be no
> opposition to having is change tracking on the RDF for the ODF document.
>
> http://markmail.org/message/4t6zlmiieno2g7on
>
>    IMHO this is a very important feature to have as a change tracked
> content.xml really wants changes to the RDF associated with the document
> text to also be seen. I'm not sure if it should be in the consensus
> report or not, but I thought I'd give a shout now in case it should be
> there ;)
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org
>


-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: office-collab-unsubscribe@lists.oasis-open.org
For additional commands, e-mail: office-collab-help@lists.oasis-open.org