[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] preferred view mode upon opening document
If we want to impose IRI across the board, that'd be ok. I was picturing something a little simpler. Maybe any non-official preferred-view-modes should just be prefixed with "x-" (like unofficial email headers). wt On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 2:52 PM, <robert_weir@us.ibm.com> wrote: > As currently proposed, option 2 does not allow extensions. Valid values > of the manifest:preferred-view-mode attribute are the three listed in the > proposal, and no more. > > If we wanted to allow additional values, and encourage uniqueness, we > could allow IRI values as well, like " > http://www.google.com/schemas/odf/view-mode1". > > This is similar to package naming conventions in Java, where the use of > packages like com.ibm.Foo piggybacks on the domain name registry > uniqueness. > > Of course, nothing can force ODF users to do this correctly, so we can > never enforce global uniqueness. But we can encourage it. > > Doing this change would look like this: > > > <define name="file-entry-attlist" combine="interleave"> > <optional> > <attribute name="manifest:preferred-view-mode"> > <choice> > <choice> > <value>edit</value> > <value>presentation-slide-show</value> > <value>read-only</value> > </choice> > <ref name="anyURI"/> > </choice> > </attribute> > </optional> > </define> > > But do we want to go down that path? This solution, although I've seen it > used in other standards, is not used in ODF anywhere else, to my > knowledge, although the issues of extensibility and namespace collisions > are universal. I dislike introducing a new design pattern, and have it be > used in only one place. "Creeping elegance" is the term that comes to > mind. > > Other ways of handling this might be: > > 1) Apply this technique throughout ODF, wherever we currently have a fixed > enumeration and we wish to allow additional custom choices. > > 2) Don't add the IRI support to the schema, but in some introductory > material, specify that any identifiers used in extensions "should" or > "shall" be based on IRI's in order to encourage global uniqueness. > > Regards, > > -Rob > > > "Warren Turkal" <turkal@google.com> wrote on 10/23/2008 12:07:02 PM: > >> >> We should have a policy for naming custom views so that applications >> can innovate in that space. I don't think that the proposal should be >> approved until we have defined a method for someone to make a custom >> view without spraying all over a global namespace. >> >> wt >> >> 2008/10/22 Ming Fei Jia <jiamingf@cn.ibm.com>: >> > Dear TC members, >> > >> > This is a proposal submitted many days ago. Here is the proposal link >> > (http://wiki.oasis-open.org/office/proposal%3Aauto- >> play_presentation_file_format). >> > >> > After several rounds of TC discussion, this time I updated in 2 minor >> > places: (1)change the proposal name from "auto-play presentation file >> > format" to "preferred view mode upon opening document" since the > latter is >> > more suitable for the proposal meaning as all TC members preferred the >> > extended option;(2) rename one of preferred view modes from > "slide-show" to >> > "presentation-slide-show" according to Warren's suggestion. >> > >> > If no substantial comments for this proposal, I would like to vote on > the >> > next TC call. Thanks. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > >
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]