Re: Changes in XML

Am Fr., 9. Okt. 2020 um 15:45ÂUhr schrieb Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>:

Svante,

Sorry, an example of bad usage of JIRA -

The resolution I "suggested" was in fact the final resolution by the TC. See Office-3873 where it says:

*****

On 10 Sept. 2018, the following language was agreed to replace the proposal previously applied:

"The under-specification of change tracking in ODF 1.2 resulted in varying implementations of this feature. Where interoperability between implementations is required, this feature should be checked for interoperability."

*****

That may be the change you applied but it's hard to tell from your emails since you don't give the text. ;-)

Thanks!

Patrick

On 10/9/20 6:32 AM, Svante Schubert wrote:

Dear TC,

I started on incremental, draft pull-request for ODF 1.3 CS02 - https://github.com/oasis-tcs/odf-tc/pull/30

In addition, atÂthis stage, decided to better stick to the TC-agreed wording from the former issue:
https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3873
Instead of following the wording recently suggested by Patrick:
https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/202010/msg00016.html

Best regards,

Svante

Am Do., 8. Okt. 2020 um 18:57ÂUhr schrieb Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>:

Svante,

I have changed the XML source file for Part 3 from:

Â<text:p text:style-name="Standard">The under-specification of change
tracking in ODF 1.2 resulted in a number of different choices being
possible as to how to implement the feature. While each of these choices
would be consistent with the way that the feature is specified, unless
identical choices are made, it is likely that the resulting
implementations would not be fully interoperable. For this reason, where
interoperability of change tracking between implementations is required,
implementers are recommended to carry <text:soft-page-break/>out
specific checks that their implementation choices are the same or
similar enough to be interoperable.</text:p> <text:p
text:style-name="Standard">The under-specification of change tracking in
ODF 1.2 resulted in a number of different choices being possible as to
how to implement the feature. While each of these choices would be
consistent with the way that the feature is specified, unless identical
choices are made, it is likely that the resulting implementations would
not be fully interoperable. For this reason, where interoperability of
change tracking between implementations is required, implementers are
recommended to carry <text:soft-page-break/>out specific checks that
their implementation choices are the same or similar enough to be
interoperable.</text:p>

to:

<text:p text:style-name="Standard">The under-specification of change
tracking in ODF 1.2 resulted in varying implementations of this feature.
Where interoperability between implementations is required, this feature
should be checked for interoperability.</text:p>

I assume the soft-page-break was a result of being loaded in LO and not
required in the XML change. Please correct if wrong.

Can you step me through my remote commit and pull request? Thanks!

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
-- 
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 

office message