OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

uoml-x-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: RE: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in PDF Version of UOML-1-v1.0

An update:

1. Screen shot.  The UOML-X-comment list did not accept the .png attachment.
I have included a .zip file containing the .png as an attachment to this
message.   I also placed the .png file here:

2. Table of Content problems.  I manually corrected the content.xml file in
the .odt package and forced OO.o 2.4.1 to regenerate the table of contents.
I was able to eliminate the duplicate entries.  There are other
   2.1 When the table of contents is regenerated using OO.o 2.4.1, the
sections 3 UOML Instructions and 4 Conformance are renumbered as 1 and 2.  I
do not know what makes the section numbering start over there.
   2.2 There are other formatting problems when an Update All is forced.

I have no useful thoughts at this point.

 - Dennis

Dennis E. Hamilton
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System Interoperability 
mailto:Dennis.Hamilton@acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ http://nfoWorks.org 

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] 

Sent: Friday, September 05, 2008 08:26
To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org; 'UOML-X Comment'
Cc: 'Mary McRae'; 'allison shi'
Subject: RE: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in PDF Version of UOML-1-v1.0

Hello Yan Shi,

I have checked the OpenOffice.org 2.4.1 version of the committee
specification.  It is identified as ODF 1.1 as expected.

I also notice that the duplicate lines in the table of contents also appear
in this form of the committee specification.  I have included a screen
capture (.png file) that demonstrates the duplication.  

I have inspected the .odt file.  The duplicate entries also appear in the
content.xml file in the ODF package.  Experimenting with OO.o 2.4.1 "Update
index/table" and "Update All" operations does not change anything.

 - Dennis

PS: I do not have any good idea how the duplication happens.  My thinking is
that the table of contents may have been created in a different computer
program.  Perhaps it can be regenerated there.

-----Original Message-----
From: allison shi [mailto:allison_shi@sursen.com] 
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 21:01
To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org
Cc: UOML-X Comment; Mary McRae
Subject: Re: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in PDF Version of UOML-1-v1.0

Hi Dennis,
Thanks for pointing out the defect of our TC's Specification, we are highly
appreciated it. Yes, you are right, this is because we used Redflag's odf
version as we just contacted them, and confirmed it.
Here attached is newly created uoml-part1-v1.0-cs01.odt, which uses
Mary, is it ok to reload this one to its proper position? Please let me know
what else we should do. Thanks.
Best rgds,
Yan Shi
Co-chair UOML-X TC

2008/9/5, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>: 

	Although the PDF version of UOML part 1 v1.0 now under review is not
the authoritative version (not sure why), it is often the most-stable
version for reference by accurate page and line citations.
	There is a peculiar defect in the PDF file at
	In the table of contents of that PDF, a number of entries appear
twice.  This happens throughout the table of contents.  This appears to be a
defect in the OpenOffice.org 3.0 beta version that was used to produce the
PDF.  I encounter the same problem when I open the .odt version with
OpenOffice.org 2.4.1, ignore the ODF-version warning, and export as PDF.
[ ... ]


[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]