[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office-comment] Mandatory parts of an ODF-package
Discussions belong on the "opendocument-users" lists, not the "office-comment" list. The office-comment list is only for public feedback on the ODF standard and drafts. The Fellowship also has a discussion list. Perhaps they can explain why their validator requires styles.xml, etc. You can join it here: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss But as an aside, if you are experimenting, don't forget that you can ignore packaging altogether and have a single XML file with <office:document> as the root element. That gives you the simplest possible "hello world" document. -Rob "Jesper Lund Stocholm" <4a4553504552@gmail.com> wrote on 08/05/2008 04:00:45 AM: > > 08/05/2008 04:05 AM > > I am trying to figure out what the mandatory parts of an ODF-package are - > but I can't seem to find a clear answer. If I read ODF 1.0 (section 2.1 > about document roots and section 17 about the package) I would conclude > this: > > Required parts of an ODF-package is the following streams in the > ZIP-archive: > > content.xml > META-INF/manifest.xml > > (actually the content.xml-stream is required only by reference (induction?) > since it contains the document data itself and the stream containing the > document must be named "content.xml". I would argue though, that given > strict reading of the spec a document would be conformant when omitting the > content.xml-stream as well). > > The problem with the above is that it goes against the output of the > OpenDocumentFellowship-validator (it requires the styles.xml, settings.xml > and meta.xml-files and mimetype-file) as well as the current implementation > of all application suites supporting ODF. > > Can you (anyone) confirm the above? It seems to me that a KISS/simple > "Hello-world"-ODF document would be perfectly valid if it only contained the > content.xml-file as well as the manifest-file. > > > Thanks, > > /Jesper Lund Stocholm > www.idippedut.dk
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]