[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=16663#action_16663 ] 

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

leap-seconds? Can somebody tell me of any use of <meta:editing-duration> that could conceivably require that precision? Or any use where it matters whether a the editing duration that is given as 2 months is really 61 days? Perhaps this meta value should simply be dropped.

If there really is a use that requires precision that is in the seconds, then we defiitely need to be more specific of when editing starts and when it ends, since the ODF file containing the ODF specs takes much longer than a few seconds to open in some programs.

> 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