OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

 View Only
Back to discussions
Expand all | Collapse all

Fwd: [office] Groups - ODF 1.0 errata 2 - draft02(OpenDocument-v1.0-errata02-ed02.odt) uploaded

  • 1.  Fwd: [office] Groups - ODF 1.0 errata 2 - draft02(OpenDocument-v1.0-errata02-ed02.odt) uploaded

    Posted 02-01-2010 13:25 
    





Hello Mary,

    
I am the editor of the errata02 and as I am new in editor business, I
got a basic question:

    
Do I have to copy/paste the errata01 into the errata02?
    
Or is a reference to the previous errata in the header of errata02
sufficient?

    
Many thanks for your help!
    
Svante


  • 2.  Re: Fwd: [office] Groups - ODF 1.0 errata 2 - draft02 (OpenDocument-v1.0-errata02-ed02.odt) uploaded

    Posted 02-01-2010 15:39 
    Note that we also need to connect to JTC1 Directives at some point, in 
particular 15.4.9.4.5 "Each technical corrigendum shall list the status of 
all amendments and technical corrigenda to the current edition of the 
standard."  So on the JTC1 side, the convention is to publish multiple 
technical corrigenda, as separate documents, each of which states how it 
relates to other published amendments and corrigenda.

It isn't clear whether the OASIS vision of Approved Errata is to do this 
as well, e.g., Approved Errata 02 includes by reference Approved Errata 
01.  Or whether Approved Errata 02 is a revision of the Approved Errata 01 
text.

Note that OASIS's commitment to JTC1 call for us to maintain technically 
equivalent specifications in both organizations.  This will be hard to do 
if JTC1 has a separate citable ISO/IEC 26300:2006/Cor. 1 and ISO/IEC 
26300:2006/Cor. 2, while we have only a single Approved Errata document 
which is revised every 6 months, and older versions cannot be reliably 
cited.

So I am hoping that ODF 1.0 Approved Errata 02 states that it applies to a 
ODF 1.0 as corrected by Approved Errata 01.  Future Approved Errata 
similarly state that Approved Errata N assume that Approved Errata 01 - 
Approved Errata N-1 have already been applied.  That gives a well-defined 
text to which Approved Errata N will be applied.

Of course the critical case is where the same part of the specification is 
corrected more than once.  This should happen only rarely, but doing this 
well is the acid test for any process around errata/corrigenda.

So imagine we have ODF 1.0:

"The fo:bar attribute gives the value of the angel in radians from 0-180"

We correct that in Approved Errata 01 with the statement:

"Replace ''angel in radians' with 'angel in degrees' "

We then notice that we used the wrong word, 'angel' rather than 'angle'. 
We correct that with Errata 02:

"Replace 'angel' with 'angle'"

Note that this is all deterministic. Apply each errata in order.  Some may 
change the same text and wipe out earlier changes.  But it is all 
deterministic and reproducible.

The problem would come if you try to combine two sets of editing changes 
into one giant errata document, and do something like sort by clause.  You 
could then end up applying changes in the wrong order.  For example, if 
"Replace 'angel' with 'angle'" is done first, then you would be unable to 
do "Replace ''angel in radians' with 'angel in degrees' ", since that text 
pattern can no longer be matched.

I certainly like the idea of a cumulative list of corrections,  but I 
think you accomplish that with clearly numbered Approved Errata, each one 
of which states that it includes by reference the previous ones.  That 
gives us a deterministic way of determining the corrected text as well as 
giving us one-to-one correspondence with the parallel ISO corrigenda.

-Rob


Svante.Schubert@Sun.COM wrote on 02/01/2010 08:24:15 AM:
> 
> Hello Mary,
> 
> I am the editor of the errata02 and as I am new in editor business, 
> I got a basic question:
> 
> Do I have to copy/paste the errata01 into the errata02?
> Or is a reference to the previous errata in the header of errata02 
sufficient?
> 
> Many thanks for your help!
> Svante
> 
> 
> 
    
                                                
    
					
                                                    

        
                                                
				
    
                                                
    
                                                    
                                                        
                                                        Original Message


Related Content