FW: Notes: 2010-07-19 Second IS 26300:2006 Amendment 1 Working Draft

[Dennis E. Hamilton]

This is the result of my second day of applying the Amendment 1 Working
Draft to a bare editable version of IS 26300:2006 with change tracking
enabled and shown.

I have reached the beginning of section 9.  There are only a few additional
matters that I noticed.  I will continue on my 2010-07-20.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton at acm.org] 
Posted At: Monday, July 19, 2010 19:42
Posted To: WG6 ODF 1.1 Alignment
Conversation: Notes: 2010-07-16 Second IS 26300:2006 Amendment 1 Working
Draft
Subject: Notes: 2010-07-19 Second IS 26300:2006 Amendment 1 Working Draft

H. The two amendments with heading

  Section 8.1.1, "Table Element", sub-section "Default Cell Style"

Should both be for 

  Section 8.1.2, "Table Row", sub-section "Default Cell Style"

I. The change made in 8.1.3 "Table Cell" subsection "Cell Content
Validation" should also be made in the paragraph following the schema
fragment.  This is an oversight in ODF 1.1.  If we decide to fix it, I will
post a JIRA issue for also adding it to the ODF 1.1 Errata 01.

J. Section 8.2.6, Subtables, Samples 1 and 2
   In the table diagram, the period added in front of each of the B2.A1,
B2.B1, and B2.A2 is an addition.  That is, it is e.g., "B2.1.1" before and
".B2.A1" after the amendment is made.  (I suspect this is something the DIFF
didn't handle well.)
   Similarly, the three changes in each of the two sample XML fragments need
the leading "." to be an insertion.

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton at acm.org] 
Posted At: Sunday, July 18, 2010 22:16
Posted To: WG6 ODF 1.1 Alignment
Conversation: Notes: 2010-07-16 Second IS 26300:2006 Amendment 1 Working
Draft
Subject: Notes: 2010-07-16 Second IS 26300:2006 Amendment 1 Working Draft

Here is an interim report on the modification of an editable version of ODF
1.0 ed.2 cs01 (the text of IS 26300:2006) to see how well I can follow the
draft amendment and make the changes in the proper locations in the text.
So far I have not been delayed by the absence of page numbers, and it is
probably no good to have them anyhow, because the pagination changes as the
amendments are applied.

I have made all of the changes up to (but not including) Chapter 8.  I think
that at this rate I may have a complete application of the amendments before
the call.

I have attached the result so far.

Here are my notes on the experience:

A. Front Matter

I notice that changes to pages numbered 1-2 before the table of contents are
not being noted.  I suspect something needs to be added for those.  The diff
is not that accurate about some things, but it is not difficult to pick up
what the changes are.

B. Change Formatting

Sometimes there has to be more deletion and replacement in the ODF Text
because of field behavior in the editable document.  Also, styles in the
editable document will need to be used when adding subsection titles, etc.
I find this easy to do by checking on the style of the nearest similar
material.

C. Noticed Defects

2.3.1 Text Documents new subsection following "Global Text Documents."  I
notice a stray word "a" in the first line of the second paragraph of the new
text.  The last word of the fifth paragraph, "false" is not set in monocase.
In the sixth paragraph there are additional font and perhaps spelling
defects.

I don't know which of these defects are in the ODF 1.1 document itself, may
be in the diff, or arose in the production of the amendment text.  I am just
going to note them in the trial amendment of IS 26300 with inserted comments
to be checked later.  (The diff back against ODF 1.1 should also reveal
something about these when I have completed the trial amendment.)

D. Schema Insertions

Schema insertions work quite well.  I usually use spaces instead of tabs and
expect to see differences because of that.  Hmm, sometime I have to use tabs
because typed spaces don't line up properly.  So I will use tabs from now
on.

The line numberings are adjusted properly and match the ones in the draft
amendment as I go.

E. Schema Cut-and-Paste

On the other hand, the schema text move in 3.1.18 does not work perfectly.
The deleted text is still line-numbered when the tracked-changes are shown,
although everything is renumbered because of the preceding insertions.

WORKAROUND: 
  1. At this point, I always save the document I have in case I mess things
up and want to revert to the saved form.
  2. Turn off Edit | Changes | Record
  3. Select the lines of deleted schema fragment.  
  4. Change the style to "Code" from "RelaxNG"
     The line numbers should disappear at this point.
  5. Turn on Edit | Changes | Record
The reason for this fussiness is that I want to verify that the line numbers
shown in subsequent amendments to schema fragments match what I seen when I
apply the amendment to the document.

F. Cross-References

I am not attempting to create links for reference citations (e.g., "[DOM2]")
nor am I doing anything about turning section numbers and sub-titles into
cross-references to sections and sub-sections.  I could do this in a
subsequent pass if it seemed necessary to do or because the final DIFF check
is too messy without fixing them.

G. New Sections

Inserting new sections is tricky.  I haven't found a clean way to prevent
the title of the new next section from being shown as having a modified
style even though nothing like that has happened.

If I insert a blank text-body line between the new section and the following
section title, everything works.  So I have done that and these will
probably show up in the DIFF done for verification at the end of all this.
I also do this where, for some reason, the text of paragraphs after the new
title keep being changed to Heading style.

 - Dennis

Dennis E. Hamilton
------------------
NuovoDoc: Design for Document System Interoperability 
mailto:Dennis.Hamilton at acm.org | gsm:+1-206.779.9430 
http://NuovoDoc.com http://ODMA.info/dev/ http://nfoWorks.org 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: IS26300-2006-Transposition+Amendment-dh-2010-07-19-1942.odt
Type: application/vnd.oasis.opendocument.text
Size: 501821 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg6/attachments/20100719/668ee77b/attachment-0001.odt>