ws-rx-editors message
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]
Subject: RE: [ws-rx-editors] Changes to RDDL docs . . .
- From: Doug Davis <dug@us.ibm.com>
- To: Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 28 Feb 2007 15:40:55 -0500
1 - sticking with pdf is fine with me
2 - I'd say some variant of "word"
- I'm not using Office Open XML when I edit - just when I generate the
PDFs.
3 - OpenDoc - what's that? :-)
thanks
-Doug
______________________________________________________
STSM | Web Services Architect | IBM Software Group
(919) 254-6905 | IBM T/L 444-6905 | dug@us.ibm.com
Marc Goodner <mgoodner@microsoft.com>
02/28/2007 02:46 PM
|
To
| Gilbert Pilz <Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com>,
"ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org" <ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org>
|
cc
|
|
Subject
| RE: [ws-rx-editors] Changes to RDDL
docs . . . |
|
1. I
think that was a previous TC decision, don’t see a reason to change.
2. Any
variation of doc or Word seems fine to me. For Office Open XML we’d have
to save in the new format, we’ve been working with the old binary format
so far. That’s a simple Save As and there are plugins to handle that format
in older versions of Word. So if that’s preferred I don’t see any issue
with that approach either. I’d say again it’s Dug’s call since he is
doing the heavy lifting here.
3. The
rules are editable source, HTML and PDF (or was PDF even required?). So
since the binary doc (or Office Open XML) is the editable format I don’t
think we need to provide any other formats unless we want to do the work.
From: Gilbert Pilz [mailto:Gilbert.Pilz@bea.com]
Sent: Wednesday, February 28, 2007 11:10 AM
To: ws-rx-editors@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: [ws-rx-editors] Changes to RDDL docs . . .
I'm thinking about what changes I need
to make to the RDDL docs for the new CD06 files. I have a couple of questions:
1.) Is the PDF document still going
to be the normative version of the spec, or should the Word document be
the normative version?
2.) If the PDF doc is still normative,
what should I call the additional link to the ".doc" documents;
"Word", "Microsoft Word", "Office Open XML"?
3.) I'm assuming we're not going to
publish any documents in OpenDoc format?
- gp
[Date Prev]
| [Thread Prev]
| [Thread Next]
| [Date Next]
--
[Date Index]
| [Thread Index]
| [List Home]