OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

 View Only
  • 1.  Checks on the ODF 1.3 specification in HTML

    Posted 02-04-2020 21:27
    Dear TC, I did some tests on the ODF 1.3 HTML specification and would like to share my notes: MathML I was happy, to find out that the 102 Object directories within the ODT ZIP are no OLE Objects, but MathML objects and are represented in the XHTML version as well as MathML und are well rendered. At least, I picked one of the 102 the first "/Object 1" and quickly tested it. You may find it close to the search-string "B-Splines. If the" within the document. I did not check all 102 as I am certain, if there are MathML problems such as rendering, everyone could switch to ODT as a representational document. This is nothing to waste time on. Images In ODF 1.2 I used several images aside from the specification. Today there are no longer images aside of the HTML specification, I made a quick test on the existence of a former image. In general, if you search for "data:image", you may found 18 occurances of images: 1 JPEG, 11 GIF and 6 png, similar to <img style="height:4.8819cm;width:4.8819cm;" alt="" src= > This looks good as well. Again I have only checked one occurrence for all, but 18 is a number quite similar to the number of the previous pictures. Broken links This link checker provided good results -> https://www.deadlinkchecker.com/website-dead-link-checker.asp There are two dead links: Status URL Source link text 404 Not Found https://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-86-2005.html http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-86-2005.html [301 from http://www.niso.org/standards/resources/Z39-86-2005.html] 404 Not Found http://citeseerx.ist.psu.edu/viewdoc/summary?doi=10.1.1.49.6093 http://cites Grammar File Naming Last, but not least. This is something, which I find quite annoying and I hope you will fix for the next release. The naming convention of the RNG grammar files was overtaken from ODF 1.0 and not from ODD 1.2, where new grammar files had been added. As I am generating software directly from the files, I would like to handle the file access by automation and only replace the version string. This is how the ODF 1.2 schema grammars were named: This is how I want the ODF 1.3 schema files to be named: But this is how the ODF 1.3 schema files are currently named, see http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/OpenDocument/v1.3/cs01/schemas/ Missing the "-cs01" identifier Having the "-cs01" identifier at the end (similar to ODF 1.0) instead of in the middle as ODF 1.2 or the OWL files. I suggest we should fix the naming for the next release and use the prior naming convention of ODF 1.2. Regards, Svante


  • 2.  Re: [office] Checks on the ODF 1.3 specification in HTML

    Posted 02-05-2020 16:29
    Hi Svante, Svante Schubert wrote: > I did some tests on the ODF 1.3 HTML specification and would like to share > my notes: > Thanks a lot! > [lots of checks] > and > I suggest we should fix the naming for the next release and use the prior > naming convention of ODF 1.2. > Agree to pretty much all points. I suspect the best way to streamline this is to automate as many steps as possible, and treat future ODF releases more like a software artifact (with a build pipeline & automated test runs)? Perhaps with the OASIS Open Projects initiative, there would even be a repository were we could stick this release automation into? Best regards, -- Thorsten Attachment: signature.asc Description: PGP signature


  • 3.  Re: [office] Checks on the ODF 1.3 specification in HTML

    Posted 02-06-2020 20:02
    Thorsten, On the pipelining, yes and no. Pipeling is a great idea, but not for the official releases. I say that because the official releases are given to the TC Admin that then preps the files for the "official" location. Having said that and without asking, I suspect a pipeline that produces non-official releases would be like other TC artifacts. That "official" releases with the same content exists shouldn't trouble anyone. Thoughts? Hope you are having a great week! Patrick On 2/5/20 11:24 AM, Thorsten Behrens wrote: > Hi Svante, > > Svante Schubert wrote: >> I did some tests on the ODF 1.3 HTML specification and would like to share >> my notes: >> > Thanks a lot! > >> [lots of checks] >> > and > >> I suggest we should fix the naming for the next release and use the prior >> naming convention of ODF 1.2. >> > Agree to pretty much all points. > > I suspect the best way to streamline this is to automate as many steps > as possible, and treat future ODF releases more like a software > artifact (with a build pipeline & automated test runs)? > > Perhaps with the OASIS Open Projects initiative, there would even be a > repository were we could stick this release automation into? > > Best regards, > > -- Thorsten -- Patrick Durusau patrick@durusau.net Technical Advisory Board, OASIS (TAB) Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300 Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps) Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net Homepage: http://www.durusau.net Twitter: patrickDurusau Attachment: signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature