RE: [oic] interop profile or interop advisories - Test Assertions

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

With regard to use of test assertions, if they are not about ODF
conformance, perhaps they could be about testing for fitting within the
guidance regardless.  I suppose that the "advisory" becomes the source (or
one of them) and the prescription level would be a new one that is coined
for this purpose.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Hanssens Bart [mailto:Bart.Hanssens@fedict.be] 
Sent: Thursday, May 27, 2010 07:09
To: oic@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: RE: [oic] interop profile or interop advisories ?

Hello Dennis,


[ ... ]

> I don't know if Test Assertions work here, but it is a reasonable
question.

It might work in "some" form, my guess is that most of the time there won't
be an authoritative statement in the ODF spec to refer to.

- the ODF specification might not provide any guidance for a certain feature
or consumer/producer behavior.

For instance, suggesting that Producers that do not support change tracking 
should hide <text:tracked-changes> when viewing an ODF document. This
seems "obvious", but it is based on a real world scenario were a colleague
of mine was viewing a document with a lightweight editor showing "garbage"
on top of the first page (which turned out to be the content of said
element)

- the ODF specification might just use "should...." , or use a non-normative
text

For instance, including a <draw:image> in PNG/SVG for embedded objects.
The spec "recommends" it, but it might be useful to "strongly advise it" (or
whatever the exact wording is) in an Advisory to remind implementers of the
importance of this recommendation, because it turned out to be a real-world
issue.

This is a case where a document / implementation is technically conformant,
but not necessarily interoperable (not sure how you express that in a TA)

[ ... ]