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: RE: [office] Re: OFFICE-2608 and Errata CD04 Defects

I checked the comparison of the COR1/Errata01 changes made to ODF 1.1 and
the diff that Patrick prepared between 1.1 and IS 26300.

There are only 4 collisions that have to be watched for.  I think we might
as well do (A) for now and adjust manually for (B).  These are the
(potential) collisions to watch out for:

 1. Section 9.3.11 sub-section Common Image Map Attributes and Elements.
There is an Errata01/COR1 change *nearby* but an amendment done as change
marking can be structured to miss that.

 2. Section 15.27.22 Errata01/COR1 change to style:wrap-dynamic-threshold
(not -treshold) in the schema fragment has already been changed in 1.1 and
it looks like a delta from IS 26300:2006.

 3. Section 16.1 Datatypes under custom data types has an errata change to
-length and there are different changes (in other parts of the same text)
made in 1.1 in contrast to IS 26300:2006.

 4. Appendix B Errata01/COR1 change to [DOMEvents] appears to be clobbered
by [DOMEvents2] and [DOMEvents3] in ODF 1.1.

 - Dennis

PS: If there is to be a full-up amended IS 26300 document produced, I think
it should not be until the very end when the amendment and the two
Corrigenda are applied, with 1.1 and IS 26300:2006/fixed-up all assured to
be in synch.

-----Original Message-----
From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
Sent: Tuesday, March 30, 2010 16:39
To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org
Cc: 'Michael Brauer'; 'ODF TC List'; 'Patrick Durusau';
Subject: RE: [office] Re: OFFICE-2608 and Errata CD04 Defects

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 03/30/2010 
06:52:29 PM:

> Good, I forgot about the reconciliation approach from the older 
> Is it good enough for the FPDAM to be prepared against IS 26300:2006 as 
> is now, before the DCORi are finalized, and sync it all in the
> reconciliation?

I think we have a choice of 3 initial texts we could do the initial diff 

A) ISO/IEC 26300
B) ISO/IEC 26300 + COR 1
C) ISO/IEC 26300 + COR 2

I don't think we want to wait for C to happen, since the DCOR ballot has 
not yet started, and we still need to make some more changes on the OASIS 
side and have another 15 day review.  So COR 2 is at least 4 months away. 

We could wait for COR 1 and option B) if we wanted, since the ballot for 
that has ended and we know what those corrections are.

Or we could do option A.  I think that is what Patrick's initial diff was.

I don't have a strong opinion on A versus B. 


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:

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