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

 


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

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


Subject: Re: [office] Version Attribute Proposal


Hi Dave,

Dave Pawson wrote:
> On 24/11/06, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg
> 
>> Dave (Pawson) noticed that the attribute is optional, and that ODF 1.2
>> document therefore may not identify themselves as such. I agree to him
>> that the version attribute should be mandatory for ODF 1.2 documents,
>> and therefore propose that we change the description and schema as 
>> follows:
>>
>>  > All root elements take an office:version attribute, which indicates
>>  > which version of this specification it complies with.
>>  >
>>  > An application that stores a document conforming to this application
>>  > *shall* use the attribute value "1.2".
>>  >
>> op> <define name="office-document-common-attrs" combine="interleave">
>>  >   <optional>
>>  >     <attribute name="office:version" a:defaultValue="1.1">
>>  >       <choice>
>>  >         <value>1.0</value>
>>  >         <value>1.1</value>
>>  >         <value>1.2</value>
>>  >         <ref name="string">
>>  >            <param name="pattern">[1-9]+\.[0-9]+</param>
>>  >         </ref>
>>  >       </choice>
>>  >     </attribute>
>>  >   </optional>
>>  > </define>
>>
>> Some notes:
>> - In order to achieve that ODF 1.0/1.2 remain valid ODF 1.2 instances, I
>>    have kept the attribute optional in the schema. The description
>>    however states that the attribute actually is mandatory for ODF 1.2
>>    documents.
> 
> I don't agree with keeping it optional.
> That would imply forward compatibility, which is clearly impossible to 
> operate.
> If that is wanted, I'd suggest wording as used in XSLT from W3C.
> If a processor for version X meets a version >X then its response is 
> undefined.

Isn't the situation I'm describing "If a processor for version X meets a 
version <X"? What I want to achieve with keeping the version attribute 
optional is that if a 1.2 processor validates a 1.0 or 1.1 document 
against the 1.2 schema, that it then does not get validation errors.

Michael
> 
> 
> 
> 
> 
>> - I have kept the possibility to use arbitrary version numbers in the
>>    schema. This shall allow to validate future document against the
>>    schema, if they don't use any new features. I'm not sure we need that.
>> - I have removed the sentences regarding validation, because it is
>>    obvious and not specific to OpenDocument that documents could be
>>    validated.
> 
> But the 'optional' schema value makes it unverifiable?
> 
> I would like to make it easy to verify compliance to a revision of the 
> spec,

Maybe I have overseen something, but if the attribute is not existing, 
then a processor would have to choose the 1.1 schema. Only if it is 
present and has the value 1.2, it has to choose the 1.2 schema.

> not impossible?

Michael
> 
> regards
> 
> 



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