Re: [office-metadata] Rough notes (I won't call them minutes justyet)

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Michael,

Snipping to your last point:

Michael Brauer wrote:
<snip>

>> 5. Preservation of all metadata? Means content not understood must be
>>    preserved. 
>
>
> We have to careful with this. What works is that we say that RDF-XML 
> streams in the package should be preserved, and that we identify a 
> couple of XML elements where we also say that meta data related 
> attributes have to be preserved. What will not work is to preserve 
> meta data at arbitrary elements.
>
Why not?

The reason why we discussed this some months ago in SC was to deal with 
the issue of "lite" applications that may not understand metadata that 
would be useful to a "richer" application (realizing that "lite" and 
"rich" are relative and rather vague terms) must preserve that metadata.

However, then the issue is, since the metadata work will allow arbitrary 
metadata (which the SC has avoided defining, working only on the 
mechanism for adding metadata), how do we distinguish what must be 
preserved.

Yes, saying RDF-XML streams in the package plus attributes on defined 
XML elements would work, but why?

ODF 1.1 says applications may preserve content that they don't understand.

I would think if preservation of content that is not understood, whether 
metadata or not, "will not work" we would not have permitted it in ODF 
1.0 and 1.1.

Granted, that may "not work" with some particular implementation 
strategy but that is not really our concern.

Close? Or did I miss the issue? Or do you see ODF 1.2 moving towards a 
more restrictive model in terms of everything in the package *must* be 
understood?

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick

-- 
Patrick Durusau
Patrick@Durusau.net
Chair, V1 - Text Processing: Office and Publishing Systems Interface
Co-Editor, ISO 13250, Topic Maps -- Reference Model
Member, Text Encoding Initiative Board of Directors, 2003-2005

Topic Maps: Human, not artificial, intelligence at work!