Details

    • Resolution:
      Hide

      Adapt schemas with attached style sheet (or a modified version of it).

      Show
      Adapt schemas with attached style sheet (or a modified version of it).

      Description

      Copied from office-comment list

      Original author: "MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given)" <eb2m-mrt@asahi-net.or.jp>
      Original date: 12 Feb 2010 00:37:58 -0000
      Original URL: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office-comment/201002/msg00022.html

        Attachments

          Activity

          Hide
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment -

          I notice that some on the TC react to this comment as an indication that the use of the Relax NG schema combine attribute is not permissible. I think it is more like "combine attribute considered harmful" because it means that the constituents of an element are not found locally. It is like using goto in programming, rather than a structured form where the interdependencies are more cohesive. On the other hand, it supported the integration of schema fragments in the narrative of the ODF 1.0/1.1 specifications and was rather creative in accomplishing that.

          I'm not objecting to cleaning this up, since we are no longer integrating with the specification narrative and the narrative no longer has that structure in any case. But as much as "abuse" is used here, I don't think that is in reference to any normative provision of Relax NG.

          I remain concerned that in changing the schema now we make it more difficult for folks to notice what changed and it bothers me a little that we will require tools to accomplish that for us.

          Show
          orcmid Dennis Hamilton (Inactive) added a comment - I notice that some on the TC react to this comment as an indication that the use of the Relax NG schema combine attribute is not permissible. I think it is more like "combine attribute considered harmful" because it means that the constituents of an element are not found locally. It is like using goto in programming, rather than a structured form where the interdependencies are more cohesive. On the other hand, it supported the integration of schema fragments in the narrative of the ODF 1.0/1.1 specifications and was rather creative in accomplishing that. I'm not objecting to cleaning this up, since we are no longer integrating with the specification narrative and the narrative no longer has that structure in any case. But as much as "abuse" is used here, I don't think that is in reference to any normative provision of Relax NG. I remain concerned that in changing the schema now we make it more difficult for folks to notice what changed and it bothers me a little that we will require tools to accomplish that for us.
          Hide
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment -

          See also OFFICE-2483

          Show
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment - See also OFFICE-2483
          Hide
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment -

          I have applied the style sheet that is attached to comment (after modifying it slightly). See

          http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/201004/msg00270.html

          I propose that we use the adapted schemas for ODF 1.2.

          Show
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment - I have applied the style sheet that is attached to comment (after modifying it slightly). See http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/201004/msg00270.html I propose that we use the adapted schemas for ODF 1.2.
          Hide
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment -

          Marked as resolved, but "NEEDS-DISCUSSION" added.

          Show
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment - Marked as resolved, but "NEEDS-DISCUSSION" added.
          Hide
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment -

          Issue was discussed in the 05/03/2010 call. No objections for refactoring the schema was raised. I'm therefore resetting the NEEDS-DISCUSSION.

          Show
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment - Issue was discussed in the 05/03/2010 call. No objections for refactoring the schema was raised. I'm therefore resetting the NEEDS-DISCUSSION.
          Hide
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment -

          Correction appear in the OPpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd04-rev01 schemas

          Show
          michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive) added a comment - Correction appear in the OPpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd04-rev01 schemas

            People

            • Assignee:
              michael.brauer Michael Brauer (Inactive)
              Reporter:
              rcweir Robert Weir (Inactive)
            • Watchers:
              0 Start watching this issue

              Dates

              • Created:
                Updated:
                Resolved: