Re: [office] list-override proposal

[Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg <Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM>]

Ben,

Ben@geniisoft.com wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> I have only recently joined, so I haven't been part of the whole 
> discussion, but isn't it fairly important that ODF 1.0/1.1 instances be 
> acceptable in ODF 1.2? I would have thought that the major promise of 

It depends on how you define "acceptable". An ODF 1.0/1.1 document of 
cause should be readable by an ODF 1.2 application, but does that mean 
that is must validate against the 1.2 schema?

> compatibility going forward, and of our documents being accessible 100 
> years from now, was that we not make older versions incompatible. Are 
> there other compelling reasons for making the assumption that ODF 
> 1.0/1.1 instances will not be valid in ODF 1.2?

The issue we faced with the version attribute actually was a technical 
one. If we would have allowed other values than "1.2", then it would 
have been possible to create documents that identify themselves as 1.1 
documents, but contain 1.2 elements. To avoid that, we only do allow the 
value "1.2", but we specify how an application should behave if a 
document has some other value there.

I hope this helps

Michael
> 
> Regards,
> 
> Ben Langhinrichs
> Genii Software
> http://www.GeniiSoft.com
> +1 216-991-5220
> 
> 
> Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM wrote on 03/09/2007 10:38:42 AM:
> 
>  > Hi Florian,
>  >
>  > Florian Reuter wrote:
>  > > Hi Oliver,
>  > >
>  > > /me is also disappointed that I don't really understand your
>  > proposal. However /me has not yet given up ;-)
>  > >
>  > > Regarding the schema you proposed in the name of Thomas and David
>  > I have the following question:
>  > >
>  > > In order to be backward compatible with ODF1.0/1.1 the list-id
>  > would have to be optional I guess. Is this mandatory by accident or
>  > by intention?
>  >
>  > I really don't mind whether we say the list-id should be mandatory, or
>  > whether it should be optional. But we have made already the decison that
>  > ODF 1.0/ODF 1.1 instances are not valid ODF 1.2 instances by making the
>  > office:version attribute mandatory, so this is more a question of the
>  > style than of backward compatibility.
>  >
>  > Best regards
>  >
>  > Michael
>  >
>  >
>  > --
>  > Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
>  > StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
>  > Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
>  > D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
>  > http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
>  > http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
>  >
>  > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
>  >       D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
>  > Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
>  > Geschaeftsfuehrer: Marcel Schneider, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
>  > Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
> 


-- 
Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS

Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Marcel Schneider, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering