[OASIS Issue Tracker] Commented: (OIC-34) Restrictions formeta:editing-duration

[OASIS Issues Tracker <workgroup_mailer@lists.oasis-open.org>]

    [ http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OIC-34?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=16655#action_16655 ] 

Andreas Guelzow  commented on OIC-34:
-------------------------------------

I don't understand why month subelements would not make sense. There are surely documents that people work on that have accumulated editing times that exceed several months in length. Several of the texts that I use in my classes and that have been slowly developed over the last decade surely have accumulated editing times in the several months. (In fact some of them were probably open in a text editor for a month at a time when they were initially created. )

> Restrictions for meta:editing-duration
> --------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: OIC-34
>                 URL: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OIC-34
>             Project: OASIS Open Document Format Interoperability and Conformance (OIC) TC
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: ODF11-InteropProfile
>    Affects Versions: Committee Draft
>            Reporter: Bernd Eilers
>            Assignee: Bart Hanssens
>            Priority: Minor
>
>  Section 3.3.2.17 of http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/download.php/33633/OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd03.odt
> defines <meta:editing-duration> Metadata as an element with a value that conforms to section 3.2.6 of the xmlschema-2 Spezifikation.
> http://www.w3.org/TR/2004/REC-xmlschema-2-20041028/#duration
>  
> I interpret the meaning of that value as the total accumulated time during which the document was being edited. Since there can be any
> number of gaps since the document was created where the document was not edited and which would thus not contribute to this total editing time a
> value here that would contain subelements specified as number of years or months does IMHO not make sense although it would be allowed by
> xmlschema-2 section 3.2.6. Number of years and months subelements in such a value being present would only make sense if we would have a
> value for some kind of elapsed time without non counted gaps in between which is not the case here.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
If you think it was sent incorrectly contact one of the administrators: http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/secure/Administrators.jspa
-
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira