[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Chart types (ODF all versions)
Dear all, 18.15.1 enumerates a number of "pre-defined chart types". In all cases these are described with a few lines of text. The descriptions are often sloppily worded and circular, depending on other chart type descriptions. As such, they are inadequate as a basis for any implementation, let alone for implementations that aspire to interoperability. So for example, for "surface charts" we are told just: ----b The values of multiple <chart:series> (marked as being of type chart:surface) are interpreted as a 'altitude' at a specific grid location. The graph may visualize these using colors for height intervals, creating color bands similar to geographical maps. ----e Is it really though that invoking "altitude" (in quotation marks) and mentioning "color bands similar to geographical maps" is sufficient for _any_ kind of technical specification, let alone a standard? The text should be corrected/expanded to provide implementers with sufficient information to implement such features without recourse to reverse-engineering existing applications. Many of these chart types probably require several pages of description, helpfully backed up with illustrations. Alternatively, if it is the contention of the TC that this terminology is well-defined in other standards, then reference these instead. - Alex.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]