[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'; Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM 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 discussions. > > Is it good enough for the FPDAM to be prepared against IS 26300:2006 as it > 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 from: 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. -Rob --------------------------------------------------------------------- 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]