DR-08-0012 Namespace Mapping Table v2

[Jirka Kosek]

Jesper Lund Stocholm wrote:

> in WG4. I think the decision is technically the correct one and it
> makes, to me, a lot of sense for implementers to have this clear
> distinction between transitional and strict files. To me this is not
> simply something we thought we should do because "we can" - it is an
> action taken by us to correct something that should have been thought
> about in the DIS29500-process. Do you really think that the NBs will
> vote this one down?

I don't think that actual vote is so important there. But by changing
namespace for Strict we are in fact introducing completely new office
document format -- especially if we decide to "clean" Strict little bit
more. From technical point of view this is probably correct approach.
But I'm still not convinced that users will applaud to possibility to
choose from three ISO office document types. And there is also
implementers side of issue. I would have much better sleep if some
vendors express their intent to support Strict OOXML. But to the date
I'm not aware of single tool/vendor who is willing to support Strict.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------
  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/20090525/76811263/attachment.pgp>