[SPAM] Re: Version not enough? re WG4's processing of CH's DRs 08-0012, 08-0013, and 08-0014

[Horton, Gareth]

Rick,

I would think that apps would enforce the version/conformance at save time, reflecting the app's limitations or the user's choice.

In the case of your example, IMO conversion to strict 2010 would sensibly occur behind the scenes, if lossless or with information presented to the user in other cases.

The opposite example, attempting to include a later object in an older version is the more likely scenario to require an MCE solution (if indeed the app has enough info to do this), stashing it away for the good of up-to-date intelligent consumers.

Although your history mechanism is likely to be very useful to advanced consumers of the spec (mainly office suites), a simple attribute can serve as a quickly accessible and easily understood 'hint' to more simplistic apps to know if they want to touch  a document or not and enable an educated guess on what to expect.

In addition, something is needed at the 'core', since it is possible that some consumers may not even support MCE. 

Gareth 

Gareth Horton
Senior Product Manager 
Datawatch Corporation 

-----Original Message-----
From: Rick Jelliffe <rjelliffe at allette.com.au>
Sent: 15 June 2009 07:42
To: MURATA Makoto (FAMILY Given) <eb2m-mrt at asahi-net.or.jp>
Cc: SC 34 WG4 <e-sc34-wg4 at ecma-international.org>
Subject: [SPAM] Re: Version not enough?  re WG4's processing of CH's DRs 08-0012, 08-0013, and 08-0014

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