Re: [office] Re: [office-comment] Re: my comments on the numberingspec proposal discussed by David F. andFlorian R.

[Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software Engineer - Sun Microsystems<Oliver-Rainer.Wittmann@Sun.COM>]

Hi Florian,

why do you changed your mind?

In your reply to my suggestion at 2007-01-22, which was corrected by 
Michael, you suggested the same as I, on which Micheal and David agreed on.

your reply from 2007-01-22:
<cite>
Wow --- thats interresting.

Let's assume the lists will restart, then I would expect:
1.
1.A.
A.i.
i.a.
</cite>


Regards, Oliver.

Florian Reuter wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> for me the result it not so clear. Michael was refering to the HTML lists. However HTML lists simple can't numbering like 1., 1.1, 1.2, .... So the behaviour at this point is undefined.
> 
> In fact my intuitive result would be
> 1.
> 1.i.
> 1.ii.
> 
> Regarding your answer at 2007-01-22. That was for :
> <list style-name="LS1">
> <list-item>
> <p>..<p>
> <list style-name="LS2">
>  <list-item> <p>..<p> </list-item>
> </list>
> <list style-name="LS3">
>   <list-item> <p>..<p> </list-item>
> </list>
> <list style-name="LS4">
>   <list-item>  <p>..<p> </list-item>
>  </list>
> </list-item>
> </list>
>  I guess.
> 
> which causes a restart of the lists. However for answer to the two types seems to be consistent.
> 
> 
> I really believe that Michaels hint to HTML does not help here, since HTML can't do this types of lists (right?). And we can derive both semantics from the HTML spec :-)
> 
> So we should clarify this in the spec. And I would vote for a "single level overrride" semantic.
> 
> 
> ~Florian
> 
> P.S.
> Can anybody with real :-) HTML knowledge please veriy my statement what 1, 1.1, 1.2, numbering of hierarchical lists on HTML is not possible. Thx.
> 
> 
> 
>>>> Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software Engineer - Sun Microsystems <Oliver-Rainer.Wittmann@Sun.COM> 01/29/07 1:20 PM >>>
> Florian Reuter wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> just wanted to get the list understanding phase restarted. 
>>
>> Is there a common sense what the following list definition will lead to?
>>
>> LS1=< {"1"/1}, {"1"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … >
>> LS2=< {"1"/1}, {"A"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … >
>> LS3=< {"A"/1}, {"i"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … >
>> LS4=< {"i"/1}, {"a"/2}, {"1"/3}, {"1"/4}, … >
>>
>> <list style-name="LS1">
>> <list-item>
>>   <p>..<p>
>>   <list style-name="LS3">
>>    <list-item> <p>..<p> </list-item>
>>    <list-item> <p>..<p> </list-item>
>>  </list>
>> </list-item>
>> </list>
>>
>> Will it be
>> 1.
>> 1.i.
>> 1.ii.
>>
>> -- or --
>> 1.
>> A.i.
>> A.ii.
>>
>> or something completely different?
>>
> 
> 
> Hi,
> 
> For me it's:
> 
> 1.
> A.i.
> A.ii.
> 
> as David, Michael and I already answered at 2007-01-22.
> 
> Regards, Oliver.
>