OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

  • 1.  revised proposal: new attributes text:style-override and text:list-id

    Posted 02-21-2007 11:19 
    Dear TC members,

This is the revised proposal about the introduction of the following new
attributes:
- text:list-id for numbered paragraphs -


  • 2.  Re: [office] revised proposal: new attributes text:style-override and text:list-id

    Posted 02-22-2007 09:24 
    Thanks for writing this up.
Just one comment;

On Wednesday 21 February 2007 11:46, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software 
Engineer - Sun Microsystems wrote:
> The ODF specification 1.1 - see chapter 4.3.1 about list blocks - states
> that only the counter domain of the direct preceding list can be
> continued using attribute text:continue-numbering. It's proposed to
> extend this statement to any preceding list.

To be clear; I didn't agree this was needed/wanted, I still have the same 
objection.  But if you want to put this in, I think you should be clearer as 
to the definition.
The previous stated that it was the directly preceding list. Which is clear. 
Now you say its any preceding list.  Which makes me ask which of all the 
preceding lists should be chosen?  And why ?

Can you extend/amend that detail of the revised proposal ?
Thanks.
-- 
Thomas Zander


  • 3.  Re: [office] revised proposal: new attributes text:style-override andtext:list-id

    Posted 02-22-2007 12:25 
    Thomas Zander wrote:
> Thanks for writing this up.
> Just one comment;
> 
> On Wednesday 21 February 2007 11:46, Oliver-Rainer Wittmann - Software 
> Engineer - Sun Microsystems wrote:
>> The ODF specification 1.1 - see chapter 4.3.1 about list blocks - states
>> that only the counter domain of the direct preceding list can be
>> continued using attribute text:continue-numbering. It's proposed to
>> extend this statement to any preceding list.
> 
> To be clear; I didn't agree this was needed/wanted, I still have the same 
> objection.  But if you want to put this in, I think you should be clearer as 
> to the definition.
> The previous stated that it was the directly preceding list. Which is clear. 
> Now you say its any preceding list.  Which makes me ask which of all the 
> preceding lists should be chosen?  And why ?
> 
> Can you extend/amend that detail of the revised proposal ?
> Thanks.

Thx for the comment.
You are right, this part is a little bit too short.

It's proposed that with the use of attribute 
text:continue-numbered="true" the counter domain of one of the preceding 
lists is continued. Such a preceding list has to fulfill the condition, 
that is applies the same list style. If more than one of such a 
preceding list exists, the one is chosen, which is found first in 
stepping backward in the document. If no such preceding list exists no 
counter domain is continued.

Regards, Oliver.


Related Content