atom feed38 messages in org.oasis-open.lists.officeRe: [office] ODF 1.2 Single-Level Con...
FromSent OnAttachments
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 8:44 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 19, 2009 9:16 am 
Patrick DurusauJan 19, 2009 10:05 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 10:10 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 19, 2009 10:31 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 10:44 am 
Patrick DurusauJan 19, 2009 10:57 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 19, 2009 11:09 am 
David FaureJan 19, 2009 11:10 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 19, 2009 12:52 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 1:29 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 1:29 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 3:18 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 19, 2009 3:46 pm 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 19, 2009 11:44 pm 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 19, 2009 11:54 pm 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 20, 2009 1:31 am 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 20, 2009 5:05 am 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 20, 2009 5:32 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 20, 2009 5:58 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 20, 2009 8:42 am 
David FaureJan 20, 2009 10:02 am 
Duane NickullJan 20, 2009 10:30 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 20, 2009 10:51 am 
David FaureJan 20, 2009 11:59 am 
robe...@us.ibm.comJan 20, 2009 12:41 pm 
David FaureJan 20, 2009 5:04 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 20, 2009 9:39 pm 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 21, 2009 12:09 am 
Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - HamburgJan 21, 2009 12:56 am 
Duane NickullJan 21, 2009 9:26 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonJan 21, 2009 11:04 am 
Duane NickullJan 21, 2009 11:31 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonFeb 3, 2009 3:23 pm 
robe...@us.ibm.comFeb 3, 2009 4:48 pm 
Dennis E. HamiltonFeb 3, 2009 8:45 pm 
robe...@us.ibm.comFeb 4, 2009 11:24 am 
Dennis E. HamiltonFeb 4, 2009 12:06 pm 
Subject:Re: [office] ODF 1.2 Single-Level Conformance and Law of Unintended Consequences
From:David Faure (fau@kde.org)
Date:Jan 19, 2009 11:10:00 am
List:org.oasis-open.lists.office

On Monday 19 January 2009, robe@us.ibm.com wrote:

Since current implementations do not (to my knowledge) introduce foreign attributes and elements into documents, they would not be impacted by this change.

By foreign, do you mean attributes and elements not defined by ODF? Then I beg to differ, there are plenty of these, see below.

Arbitrary extensions are outside of any basis for interoperability, so I'd argue they should be outside of conformance.

Obviously.

The point is that the ODF 1.2 metadata was designed to remove the need for foreign elements and attributes. That original extensibility feature was not intended for extending the processing model of ODF, though in theory it could be (mis)used for that purpose. But in practice, the mechanism has not been used at all.

I am very surprised by this; either I'm misunderstanding what this is about, or the use of extensions isn't known enough by this TC.

Let me point out some examples:

* KWord can save a table style that points to a frame+paragraph style, it does
that by using the koffice:frame-style-name and koffice:paragraph-style-name properties in the
style. This doesn't create a huge interop problem since existing documents are rendered fine by
other implementations, those properties are only used when creating new tables.

* KWord can define the behavior of a frame when a new page is created (for
DTP-like usage where you might want a similar frame to be created on the next page at the exact
same position; another one use case is a company logo in a page corner for instance). This is done with koffice:frame-behavior-on-new-page in the frame style; and
here again it only affects further editing, not rendering of a given document.

* OpenOffice has similar things, using the
xmlns:ooo="http://openoffice.org/2004/office" namespace for instance. or xmlns:ooow="http://openoffice.org/2004/writer" or
xmlns:oooc="http://openoffice.org/2004/calc".

Is this what "foreign elements and attributes" was about?