Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Reason and example arguing for the use of an ODF (or XML) canonical form

["Peter Dolding" <oiaohm@gmail.com>]

On Fri, Jul 11, 2008 at 5:18 PM, Dave Pawson <dave.pawson@gmail.com> wrote:
> This will identify any 'foreign' content in an odf document
>
> Usage as a comment.
>
> HTH
>
>
> <?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
> <xsl:stylesheet xmlns:xsl="http://www.w3.org/1999/XSL/Transform";
>  xmlns:dp="http://www.dpawson.co.uk/ns#";
To a point.  Issue is conflict.  Nothing is stopping conflicting keys.
  Sorry to have to say central bodies have worked on different
standards.  Opengl for 1.   Thiers is dual.  Namespace and central
reporting.   Note the central reporting is just a mailing list.  Hey
we have added this new feature this is what it does and this is how to
use it.

This works quite well since the next time the standard gets updated
the mailing list is searched for useful ways of doing things.

Most parties that say that this kind of central reporting is hard
normally have poor internal documentation on what they are doing.
Also are non consistent in there own code production.

Central reporting biggest one not to use them have been Microsoft.
So sorry really there is nothing blocking it.

Central reporting exists so everyone knows what everyone else is doing
and does not cause problems with each other and don't duplicate same
things up.   Opengl also started with name space only.  Until one day
they woke up and had 4 different ways of doing exactly the same thing
called 4 different things and no one wanted to change to the other
ways of doing things because it would cost them money.   So there are
not that many companies working on opengl.  How bad do you think ODF
is going to get.   W3C is also a smaller number of players also had
the same issue.  Basically we have central reporting now and avoid it
or wait until the day comes of a costly problem then everyone decides
central reporting is a good thing.  Really do we have to repeat
history again.

Peter Dolding