Robin,
Apologies for the slow response!
Comments below:
On 06/18/2012 10:44 AM, Robin LaFontaine wrote:
Patrick,
Thanks for these examples - I think it would help if we all
encoded exactly the same sample, so here is my suggestion (which
is subject to your approval that I have interpreted your cases
correctly)
1st Case
1. Original saved by 1st author
<text:p>This is the original paragraph, created with
change tracking on so seen as an added paragraph.</text:p>
2. 2nd author changes text:
<text:p>This is the second version of the paragraph, created with change tracking on so seen as a modifed
paragraph.</text:p>
Transferred back to 1st author, but that is not a further
change.
2nd case
1. Original
<text:p>This is the original
paragraph, created with change tracking on so seen as an added
paragraph.</text:p>
2. 1st author changes text:
<text:p>This is the original
paragraph, created with change tracking on so seen as an added
paragraph, which is then modified.</text:p>
3. 1st author changes text again:
<text:p>This is the modified
paragraph, created with change tracking on so seen as an added
paragraph, which is further modified.</text:p>
Are these specific examples OK?
Yes, with the understanding that the second example should reflect a
manual "save" event that fixes the text that is then subject to
change tracked modification.
In other words, if in a single editing session, with no saves, I
type:
Here is the incorrect text.
and seeing I have made a mistake I move the cursor and reform the
text to read:
Here is the correct text.
There should be no change tracking recorded because I am in a single
editing session.
Or did I succeed in making the use case less clear?
Thanks!
Hope you are having a great day!
Patrick
Robin
On 14/06/2012 00:19, Patrick Durusau wrote:
Greetings!
Apologies for the slow posting!
The only additional requirement uncovered by the select
committee is:
Nested change tracking, which the committee takes to mean, with
change tracking on:
1st case: 1st author creates a text, saves it and transfers it
to 2nd Author. The 2nd author makes changes. The 2nd author
transfers the text back to the original author.
The 1st author makes changes to the changes made by the 2nd
author.
2nd case: Author creates a text and saves it (not auto-save).
After manual save, author makes changes to the text. After
another manual save, the author makes changes to their changes.
(The manual save was suggested as a session marker for
engagement of change tracking.)
Advocates of change tracking proposals should post (email is
fine) examples of how their proposals handle nested change
tracking as illustrated by these two cases.
Hope everyone is having a great week!
Patrick
--
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin La Fontaine, Director, DeltaXML Ltd "Experts in information change"
T: +44 1684 592 144 E: robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com
http://www.deltaxml.com
Registered in England 02528681 Reg. Office: Monsell House, WR8 0QN, UK
---------------------------------------------------------------------
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
Former 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
|