RE: [oic] application scenario The Hague

[Hanssens Bart <Bart.Hanssens@fedict.be>]

Hi Andreas,



Mm, OK, behavior might not be the correct word either. ("interfacing" ? "user interaction" ?)

Of course many aspects of "behavior/interaction" are outside the scope of the file format, but nevertheless some aspects are expected by users of an office implementation

For instance: updating a text:date field may be done automatically by the implementation, or perhaps the user has to perform an update action by right-clicking or whatever. But at least it should be possible to let the implementation somehow do this for you, without you having to type in the current date manually...


Best regards,

Bart


-----Original Message-----
From: Andreas J Guelzow [mailto:aguelzow@math.concordia.ab.ca] 
Sent: woensdag 3 juni 2009 18:41
To: oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oic] application scenario The Hague

On Wed, 2009-06-03 at 15:23 +0200, Hanssens Bart wrote:
> So uhm, more or less "behavior" ?
> 
> 

Most behaviour should really fall outside of the file format
requirements. If you expect the same behaviour in all things, how would
implementations really differ from each other?!

Andreas
> 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
> Sent: woensdag 3 juni 2009 15:06
> To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> Cc: Hanssens Bart; michiel@nlnet.nl; oic@lists.oasis-open.org; Stephen.Peront@microsoft.com
> Subject: RE: [oic] application scenario The Hague
> 
> I was thinking that "dynamic" would encompass runtime behaviors beyond 
> mere presentation.  So how a user may interact with the document.  Links 
> would be one example.  Formula recalculation would be another.  Ability to 
> re-edit charts would be another.  Activating OLE embeddings would be 
> another.
> 
> -Rob