Re: [office] Re: Towards a more modular ODF?

[Robin LaFontaine <robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com>]

Change tracking has been mentioned as a possible candidate here, and I suggest what we are calling the Generic Change Tracking (GCT) would be appropriately handled this way. The proposal for Extended Change Tracking (ECT) does not, I believe, lend itself to this approach.

Indeed there are probably other advantages to GCT being developed with a bit of independence as a module:
- it has potential application for other XML formats, so could be a useful contribution to other areas (which might include any other XML formats that may be included/allowed in ODF in the future)
- there is no XML standard existing in this space at the moment
- it could be selectively incorporated in new versions of ODF as was felt appropriate, e.g. there is a debate in the Advanced Document Collaboration subcommittee at the moment as to whether change tracking in spreadsheets and presentations is needed.
- it is technically fairly complete at the moment (specification, worked and working examples, code, prototype implementations)

However, it is premature to take this forward because the ADC is still debating what approach is best for ODF.

Robin

On 28/07/2011 13:57, Patrick Durusau wrote:

4E315CBD.8090203@durusau.net" type="cite">Charles,

On 7/28/2011 4:17 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:

Hello Rob,

<snip>

This is the question of having a time-boxed schedule or a feature-boxed
schedule.  But we don't need to be so rigid about this either way.  For
example, we can have time-boxed CSD's (every 6 months) while having the
final CSD (the eventual CS) be feature-boxed.

I know this sounds expensive but how about "testing" this modular approach with the 1.3/1.4? We can always reassess this method in due time and revert back to the former one if necessary. I'm in favor of experimenting responsibly, so let's go ahead with a modular approach.  :-)

What I am missing is what "module" is ready for work or progression as Rob describes?

That is rather than discuss potential modules, let's have someone propose work that might make a good module to proceed at a different pace and see what happens.

If other parts of the standard aren't progressing as rapidly, perhaps that work should move out on its own.

I suppose I am looking for something more concrete than modularization as an idea. May be a very good idea but so far I haven't seen any dragging or rapidly proceeding parts for ODF 1.3/ODF-Next.

Hope you are having a great day!

Patrick

-- 
-- -----------------------------------------------------------------
Robin La Fontaine, Director, DeltaXML Ltd  "Change control for XML"
T: +44 1684 592 144  E: robin.lafontaine@deltaxml.com      
http://www.deltaxml.com      
Registered in England 02528681 Reg. Office: Monsell House, WR8 0QN, UK