[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: OpenDocument v1.2 draft 7-5
Dear TC members, as announced recently, I have developed an XSLT stylesheet that checks whether all element and attributes that are defined by the schema do also have a heading and an reference anchor in the specification document. In agreement with Patrick, I have added all missing headings and anchor points to the specification. The result is draft 5 that I have uploaded today. The editable version of the document can be found here: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/28892/OpenDocument-v1.2-draft7-5.odt A version with generated cross references and default values can be found here: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/28893/OpenDocument-v1.2-draft7-5-xref.odt During the test I found an error in the schema that I have corrected. The updated schema is available here: http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/28891/OpenDocument-schemas-v1.2-draft7.zip Most changes I made are minor changes, like the addition of a missing heading or anchor points (in ODF 1.1, some attributes were described as part of their parent element only) or the correction of spelling errors. The larger changes I made are: - I have partially integrated the meta data proposal, since I had integrated this already in the schema, with the result that many differences were reported. - We had no separate sections and description for the child elements and attributes of style:font-face, svg:linearGradient and svg:radialGradient. Reason was that we adopt these elements from SVG, so that a reference to the elements itself was sufficient. However, since we included the schema, I have added section for all child elements and attributes. I had already developed a test that checks whether all element and attribute headings and anchors that appear in the specification do also appear in the schema. We therefore can say for draft 5 that all elements and attributes in the schema have a heading and an anchor point in the specification, and vice versa. One of the open questions is whether we want to include the schema into ODF 1.2 (as we did with ODF 1.0 and 1.1). I have to say here that I was in favor of this. My main argument was that this makes it easier to keep the specification and the schema consistent. However, with the tests we have now and because we generate all cross references from the schema itself, I believe that at least this argument is not valid any longer. So, the question whether to include the schema or to keep it separate in my opinion now is just a question of style and usability of the specification. I personally could imagine that we keep the schema separate, but that just my personal opinion that I have right now. Best regards Michael P.S.: I intent to upload the consistency check stylesheets to the document repository in the next couple of days. -- 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: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]