oiic-formation-discuss message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Deliverable: odf-diff?
- From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com
- To: oiic-formation-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org
- Date: Mon, 23 Jun 2008 10:02:49 -0400
Sander Marechal <s.marechal@jejik.com> wrote
on 06/22/2008 05:52:24 AM:
>
> Yes. It would be much like the xml-c14n spec. To steal from the xml-c14n
> spec:
>
> "[A set of] specification[s] that describes a method for generating
a
> physical representation, the canonical form, of an [ODF] document
that
> accounts for the permissible changes."
>
> I'm writing "A set of" here because we'd need more than
one. We'd need a
> spec to canonicalize styles.xml, content.xml, the manifest, the zip
file
> (packing order of the files? it may already be in the zip spec. If
so,
> this could be skipped), etcetera.
Of course this could be a single document, with different
sections pertaining to each of: styles.xml, content.xml, etc.
The nice thing about this overall approach is it takes
us from writing a tool, or defining a tool, to defining an set of abstract
operations on an ODF document instance. The resulting "Canonical
ODF" could be used by a diff'ing tool, but could also be used for
things like digital signatures. Similarly, the W3C's XML Signature
standard uses C14N to ensure that logically equivalent XML instances have
the same hash values.
-Rob
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]