[SPAM] DR 08-0012 Discussion document for teleconference on Thursday about namespace change

[Jirka Kosek]

Horton, Gareth wrote:

> Obviously the strict namespace does need to change.  For data
> integrity purposes, I think there is also a very good case for the
> transitional namespace to change.

As Strict is a proper subset of Transitional it will be really strange
to use different namespaces for those two document types. Changing
namespace only for Strict will prevent consumption of Strict documents
in applications written for consumption of Transitional documents.

> In 18.17.4.1 - "All date values stored in cells within a
> SpreadsheetML file are stored in the ISO 8601 format."
> 
> Would you implement writing a serial date by default going off the
> spec? No.  

I think that pragmatic implementer will by default save dates as serial
numbers. Otherwise he will produce documents which will be failing in
currently deployed applications like MSO2007 or OOo3. At least for few
years until existing applications are patched. There is nothing in specs
which prevents writing dates as serial values.

> We can assume that going forward, all dates in
> transitional and strict files will be ISO 8601. Maybe some apps will
> roundtrip the existing data, so there won't be an acceleration of
> existing documents being silently updated, but we can assume all new
> instances will write ISO 8601.

I think that this is not reasonable assumption but merely wish.

> On the other hand, I have not heard the all the detailed arguments
> for keeping the transitional namespace, so I'll reserve judgement
> until then, as I have not had a lot of time to consider the other
> side.

If the namespace is changed existing applications will not be able to
open and process new OOXML files. This will prevent mangled ISO dates
and several other problems but it will greatly confuse people. Why my
.xlsx file is not working in this app which can work with other .xlsx
files? Namespace change results in completely new document type, which
should have new content type and file extension.

I don't think that users will have sympathy for another XML based office
format in this very short period of time. Especially when this new
format is not that much better then ECMA-376. We should give users some
break and maybe after few years when we got more feedback and experience
we can finally come with a great new and lucid office file format which
will supersede OOXML, ODF, ... But we are not yet there.

Standards should create stable and predictable environment both for
users and implementers. If we decide to change namespace now, this
change will be voted on and eventually published more then one year
after IS 29500 was accepted by vote and almost year after the standard
was published. I don't think this is a stable ground which IS should
create.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
  Jirka Kosek      e-mail: jirka at kosek.cz      http://xmlguru.cz
------------------------------------------------------------------
       Professional XML consulting and training services
  DocBook customization, custom XSLT/XSL-FO document processing
------------------------------------------------------------------
 OASIS DocBook TC member, W3C Invited Expert, ISO JTC1/SC34 member
------------------------------------------------------------------

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 258 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://mailman.vse.cz/pipermail/sc34wg4/attachments/20090430/f9743e60/attachment.pgp>