OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: [OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OFFICE-1360) Public Comment:xml:ids discardable - what!? (ODF 1.2CD01)

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1360?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14859#action_14859 ] 

Michael Brauer commented on OFFICE-1360:

Regarding "the result that is desired is that all pointers to elements in the file be maintained". That is true, but isn't the assumption anyway that all information and all references are maintained. We use for instance ID/IDREF references within forms and graphical shapes, without explicitly stating that these have to be maintained. We just assume that an application that supports these features will maintain the references in order to properly support that feature.

So, while references are a little bit more complex, they are actually not different than let's say a bold formatting. The assumption here is as well that this is properly maintained. That means, that it is preserved, but also that the positions where it starts and ends are not changed and that no bold formatting is added where it did not exist.

Regarding "if external metadata points into a file that has been edited, there are no guarantees that the metadata will still be valid". That's also true, but it applies already to metadata contained in the document.

The problem we face is that terms like "shall" or "should" belong to our language for formal conformance definition, but that "editing" a document is difficult to define formally: Editing has the purpose to modify a document. Whether a reference or other piece of information shall or must not be included in the edited document does not only depend on the purpose of the editing application, but also on the authors intention. I actually like the term "maintain", because it better reflects that reference may intentionally change. So, we may consider to replace the occurrences of "preserve" with "maintain".

I'm anyway wondering if we really have to state for some attributes or elements that they should be maintained/preserved, while we don't do so for others, or whether the assumption should be that all information is maintained. Anyway, I have no objections keeping the language we have if we think that it may not be obvious that xml:id is used to build references that have to be maintained, too.

An option (not really a suggestion) would be to turn this is into a note. This may provide a hint to implementers that xml:id's may be referenced, but at the same time would treat them formally as any other attribute or element.

> Public Comment: xml:ids discardable - what!?  (ODF 1.2CD01)
> -----------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: OFFICE-1360
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-1360
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC
>          Issue Type: Bug
>          Components: Metadata
>    Affects Versions: ODF 1.2
>            Reporter: Robert Weir 
>            Assignee: Patrick Durusau
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: ODF 1.2
> Copied from office-comment list
> Original author: "Alex Brown" <alexb@griffinbrown.co.uk> 
> Original date: 7 Mar 2009 10:01:55 -0000
> Original URL: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/200903/msg00084.html

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]