Jesper,<br><br>Just a matter of detail, while I'm reading (which doesn't imply I support this proposal)<br><br>I don't think it is a good idea to enforce the type of the value to be a float. We don't know what the future would be and we may end up willing to have something like "1.2.1" or event "1.2-extended"<br>
<br>Cheers,<br><br>Mohamed<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Thu, Jun 11, 2009 at 9:24 AM, Jesper Lund Stocholm <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:jesper.stocholm@ciber.dk">jesper.stocholm@ciber.dk</a>></span> wrote:<br>
<blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
<div link="blue" vlink="purple" lang="DA">
<div>
<p><b><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">Conformance attribute
proposal:</span></b></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">Shawn and I have
thought about the conformance attribute – especially in the light of the
changed namespace for strict documents.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">We’d like to
propose the following change:</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p style="text-indent: -18pt;"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"><span>1.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">remove the conformance clause attribute that
was created during the BRM</span></p>
<p style="text-indent: -18pt;"><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"><span>2.<span style="font-family: "Times New Roman"; font-style: normal; font-variant: normal; font-weight: normal; font-size: 7pt; line-height: normal; font-size-adjust: none; font-stretch: normal;"> </span></span></span><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">Add a new optional “version”-attribute
on the root elements, i.e. for WordProcessing, Presentation and
Spreadsheet-documents.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">Rationale:</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">The conformance
clause was added to be able to distinguish between documents of different
conformance classes – a proposal created at the BRM. Now that we have
created an even stronger tool (changing the namespace for strict documents) we
don’t need this attribute any more. Further – should it remain, it
would be a source of ambiguity while allowing a strict document
(namespace-wise) to specify a conformance class value of “transitional”..
What we do need, however, is a way to specify versioning of the applied
specification.</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">So – there are
all sorts of nitty-gritty details to how to do the version-attribute. A
suggestion would be to have the constraints on the attribute vary between
strict and transitional schemas. So the version attribute could be created as
this</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><b><u><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">strict</span></u></b></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">default: 1.1 IS29500:2008</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">constrain: MinInclusive=”1.1”,
type=”xs:double”</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">We could have the spec
specify that these values are reserved:</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">1.1: IS29500</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">1.2: IS29500 (amd/cor
1)</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><b><u><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">transitional</span></u></b></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">default: 1.0
(ECMA-376 1<sup>st</sup> ed)</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">constrain: MinInclusive=”1.0”,
type=”xs:double”</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">We could have the spec
specify that these values are reserved:</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">1.0: ECMA-376 1<sup>st</sup>
ed</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">1.1: IS29500</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">1.2: IS29500 (amd/cor
1)</span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><span style="color: rgb(31, 73, 125);" lang="EN-US">The important thing
at this point is not the details (we’ll sort these out in Copenhagen) but
to get a consensus that this is a path we should proceed on.</span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
<p><b><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: rgb(31, 73, 125);">Jesper
Lund Stocholm</span></b><b><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br>
</span></b><span style="font-size: 8pt;"><img src="cid:image001.gif@01C9EA76.7624BF10" alt="cid:013131611@18122007-1E12" height="57" width="113"></span><span style="font-size: 10pt;"><br>
<span style="color: gray;">Lautruphøj 1-3<br>
DK-2750 Ballerup<br>
Denmark</span></span></p>
<p><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;" lang="EN-US">Tlf.: +45 30 94 55 70<br>
Email: </span><a href="mailto:jesper.stocholm@ciber.dk" title="mailto:jesper.stocholm@ciber.dk" target="_blank"><span style="font-size: 10pt; color: gray;" lang="EN-US">jesper.stocholm@ciber.dk</span></a><span lang="EN-US"></span></p>
<p><span lang="EN-US"> </span></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear="all"><br>-- <br>Innovimax SARL<br>Consulting, Training & XML Development<br>9, impasse des Orteaux<br>75020 Paris<br>Tel : +33 9 52 475787<br>Fax : +33 1 4356 1746<br><a href="http://www.innovimax.fr">http://www.innovimax.fr</a><br>
RCS Paris 488.018.631<br>SARL au capital de 10.000 €<br>