Version not enough? re WG4's processing of CH's DRs 08-0012, 08-0013, and 08-0014

[Rick Jelliffe]

MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) wrote:
> It is probably a good idea to introduce a very simple attribute 
> for distingushing Ecma 1st edition and 29500 without trying to 
> solve all problems about versioning now.
>   
Fair enough.

I have a further question. (I apologize if this was already clarified 
during the teleconference,
I didn't get any sound.)  The current proposal, as I understand it, is 
for a version attribute on
the root element of the content XML document.

Lets say we have a WP application. We open an IS29500:2010 Strict 
document A, and we open an Ecma document
B.  We cut a drawingml graphic from B and paste it into A, then save A.

Will the WP application be

  1) required to convert the graphic to IS29500:2010 strict,
  2) allowed to save the old form only, as an island,
  3) required to use MCE so the old and new form is there?

If 2 or 3 is the case, then the version attribute does not apply to all 
the contents of the document: it may apply reliably to the top-level 
namespace elements, but in any MCE or namespace, we don't know.

So I suggest that if a simple version attribute is being used, it may 
(unless we disallow 2 and 3) need to be allowed on any top-level element 
of any new-namespace branch, and integrated into the MCE mustUnderstand 
and choice capabilities.

Cheers
Rick