OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-formula message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]


Subject: Supplemental on conformance for documents


Greetings!

After sleeping on it for a while, I think I hit everywhere but on the 
actual problem in my last post. ;-)

The problem with the current formula draft is that it *only* talks about 
application conformance.

What it needed is a separate conformance clause that gathers up the 
"portable" document requirements up into a document conformance clause.

Written with the understanding that a document only ever exhibits 
syntactic conformance to openFormula. That is to say that a document 
that claims conformance up to the "medium" group, will not contain any 
use of the BITRSHIFT function (in the large group).

Another point that I think we will need to watch for in a document 
conformance clause is to avoid reference to the semantics of any 
openFormula expression. Semantics appear only as a side-effect of 
processing and by definition, document conformance to openFormula does 
not involve processing. In other words, from the standpoint of a 
document, either strings that appear within it conform to the syntax 
defined by openFormula  or not.

I think that is important in part because it frees openFormula to define 
what conforming to the semantics of openFormula  means and does not 
leave room for other, supplemental definitions of those semantics.

Hope everyone is having a great day!

Patrick


-- 
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) 



[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]