Three types of style - a bridge too far? common, automatic, and master

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Greetings!

As I construct the clean change tracked ODF 1.2 to ODF 1.3 document, it
occurred to me, not for the first time, that we really should just have
styles and their usage, in a master page element or as a user invoked
style, really should be the only difference.

That is treating some styles as attributes of objects as opposed to
having objects to which styles are applied, in some appropriate context,
seems unnecessary and introduces exceptions for styles that are
unnecessary.

Is that a bridge too far for ODF 1.4? Or would it involve such a level
of change for implementations that it would be better addressed in a
future ODF 2.0?

Not about to start on such work right at the moment but it's something
that might make it easier to explain and implement ODF.

No hurry but wanted to see if there were any strong feelings the
division among styles?

Thanks!

Hope everyone is having a great week!

Patrick

-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature