RE: [office] Clarifications

[Philip Boutros <Philip.Boutros@stellent.com>]

Hi Daniel

*text-global
So what elements would be allowed in text-global vs. text?

*image
I really have three reasons to think office:image is an interesting
genre. I'm not sure myself if this is a compelling enough case to
include office:image but I though I'd throw it out there and see how
people respond.

1.
Having office:image seems to me to add completeness and consistency to
the spec even if the use cases for an office document over a .gif or
.jpeg are not seriously compelling.

2.
The current spec allows draw:image to include inline binary (BASE64)
data for the image right in the office file so there is not necessarily
a separate linked image. A "single image" office file can stand on its
own.

3.
When processing (especially conversion and rendering) of these types of
formats it is often very useful to branch on the difference between a
standalone image and a drawing. A image can usually be rendered or
converted fairly directly while a drawing usually takes a 2D drawing
engine of some kind to render or convert. If we leave the spec with just
office:drawing then we put the consumer in a situation where it must
look inside the drawing to determine if its contents are a single image
or a real set of drawing primitives. I should note that this is more of
an optimization issue than anything else but it is a real one that we
(Stellent) have run into many times.

-Phil

-----Original Message-----
From: Daniel Vogelheim [mailto:Daniel.Vogelheim@sun.com] 
Sent: Friday, February 07, 2003 1:06 PM
To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office] Clarifications


Hello Phil,

> Can someone describe the difference between text and text-global?

'text-global' documents refer to other documents for inclusion; they are

not self-contained. 'text' documents can (via sections) also include 
other documents, but then the content is always copied into the 
document, so that the resulting doc is self-contained.

The OOo application treats those a little different in that it offers a 
few different tools when editing 'text-global' docs.

> Do we want a office:image genre that contains just a draw:image? While

> this can be done by putting a single draw:image under office:drawing 
> it is often interesting and valuable to differentiate between a 
> drawing and a single image as early as possible when processing a 
> document.

Hmm, well, I half see the point. :-)

If one has only a single image (as in .jpg image), then why would one 
want to wrap it in an XML office document?

Sincerely,
Daniel