Hi Daniel,
On Sat, Feb 25, 2006 at 22:41:28 +0000, Daniel Carrera wrote:
> The only drawback of levels is that we might see spreadsheets complying
> to level 1 only and then saying to their customers "we're compliant".
> For this reason, I'd like level 1 to be good and meaningful for the
> average user.
How do we identify the average user? The average bank clerk has other
needs than the average home user than the average engineer.
> I don't know about levels >1 but I think that it's important that level
> 1 be complete enough to guarantee interoperability for most users. I
> wonder, is this goal compatible with the goal of making level 1 suitable
> for tiny PDAs?
I'm not familiar with tiny PDAs, what function set do they support?
> * As a developer, I don't want the spec telling me how to do UI. That is
> none of the spec's business.
> * UI considerations may be incompatible with interoperability goals.
> * Adding UI requirements will only create a gratuitious barrier. No one
> will change their UI just to comply with OpenDocument. Even I might not.
> * UI considerations would make the spec much larger for no benefit that
> I can see.
> * OpenDocument doesn't include UI.
5 very valid points. Thanks.
> test cases == lower barriers to adoption
>
> Isn't this one of the reasons why OpenDocument uses RelaxNG instead of
> DTD? Because RelaxNG allows you to make a more precise automated test?
Isn't that more because OASIS endorses RelaxNG and RelaxNG is going ISO?
Honestly, I've no idea.
> >Wheeler believes it is VERY difficult to write unambiguous text,
>
> Mathematical information is easier to convey in mathematical language.
>
> Formula spec == mathematical information.
> Test cases == mathematical language.
>
> >* Discuss use of Wiki. Do we want to try to put stuff in a Wiki
> >and LATER transition text to ODF? Transition to an ODF document NOW?
>
> We have to use the OASIS wiki, right? Can non-OASIS people use the OASIS
> wiki?
What I have understood, OASIS resources can only be used by OASIS
members, which is good in terms of copyright because a member declares
to only contribute work he owns the copyright for, and every committee
work has to be done using OASIS resources for transparency.
> >One issue: The Wiki must be MoinMoin, and it's unclear if OASIS will
> >install the MoinMoin math formula support. Without formula support,
> >formulas may be harder to create.
>
> Formulas are hard to create with OpenDocument tools also. And I don't
> fancy using LaTeX for the spec.
What about OOoMath?
> I don't like the "strict" vs "loose" idea. I'm ok with the levels idea,
> but in general I'd prefer to define scemantics strictly.
The problem with defining semantics strict at the moment is that there
are several semantics and only a few applications do it identical, if at
all.
> poor scemantics == poor interoperability
Strict defined semantics == at most 2 applications supporting it.
> I don't think that strict scemantics have to be a problem as long as the
> formula spec also provides explicit type conversion functions. Consider
> this example:
>
> * In BobOffice "3"+3 is 6.
> * In AlliceOffice "3"+3 is an error.
> * Take this spreadsheet in BobOffice
>
> A
> 1 "3"
> 2 3
> 3 =A1+A2
>
> When I *save* this spreadsheet in BobOffice, the cell A3 could be saved as:
>
> =StringToNum([.A1])+A2
>
>
> Now, when I open the file in AliceOffice, AlliceOffice sees the explicit
> conversion and gives me the appropriate result.
Except if A1 contained "3,1" or "12.345,67" or "1/2/3" (intended as
date). And what is "12'234.56"?
> CONSEQUENCES:
>
> * Now we have interoperability.
> * BobOffice doesn't have to change the UI.
> * But BobOffice and AliceOffice must implement a StringToNum() function.
Which wouldn't help without information about which input locale the
string originated from.
Eike
