[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] compact syntax
Lars, Lars Oppermann wrote: > Hi Bruce, > > Apropos compact syntax... Although I am currently not really fluent at > it - because we use the xml syntax in our spec - It may actually be > worth considering migrating the spec to use the compact syntax, as it > is indeed much more palatable. I don't think that this would impact > our nice automatic extraction process, which allows us to have a > common document for the schema and the specification text. After all, > converting between the two representations is an isomorphism. > > What do others think about this? > Well, I was reluctant when Svante first mentioned it to me but after thinking about the advantages (see below) I am on balance in favor of it. The advantages that I see are: 1. Compactness: No real surprise but I think we have to realize that as the OpenDocument standard gets longer that readability becomes more and more of an issue. I don't know how many pages we will save but assuming it is 50+, I think it would be worth the effort. 2. General readability: Despite the fact that the OpenDocument standard will be read almost exclusively by standards geeks and implementers (not always the same group), I think anything that we can do to make it easier to read would be worth the effort. I must confess that I read markup (the angle bang stuff) almost as easily as I read clear text but I suspect that is more prevalent among old SGML/XML hands than the current generation working with XML markup. Hope you are having a great day! Patrick -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34 Acting Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps) Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Co-Editor, OpenDocument Format (OASIS, ISO/IEC 26300)
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]