I’ve been away since June 13 and am still catching up on a three-week pile. I’m out for a week and a half again starting the end of this week. I’ll try to
look into this, but can’t make a definite promise just yet.
Haven’t we already looked at nested changes? For example, the original ECT proposal doc had an example on multiple formatting changes and the supplement doc
added cases under the Compound Changes section such as “add text, format it, delete it”.
John
From: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org [mailto:office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org]
On Behalf Of Robin LaFontaine
Sent: Thursday, June 21, 2012 7:44 AM
To: office-collab@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office-collab] Additional use case for change tracking
Patrick - thanks for your clarification, I did interpret it correctly and will post a GCT solution in a following email
Robin
On 21/06/2012 11:48, Patrick Durusau wrote:
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
..snip
--
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
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