On Monday 17 March 2003 18:35, Philip Boutros wrote:
> Hi all
>
> I am in the unfortunate position of trying to argue against Daniel's options 1 and 2 and for his option 3. While I agree that options 1 can express the formatting required to display the lists correctly, it fails to correctly capture the real semantic information in the major word processors. In all major word processors lists and numbering are closely associated with paragraph style. Going with option 1 or option 2 removes this association and loses important (from the word processor's point of view) information in the process. Without this association we are guaranteeing that a conversion from Word to OO and back to Word is significantly lossy in this area. Like it or not, numbering is not structure in any real sense in these formats, its just sophisticated style. We would be doing a disservice to the word processing community if we choose to drop this type of numbering in favor of a lossy (from the word processor's point of view) structure based list scheme purely to make XSLT writers lives easier.
Interesting....
I fail to see what is being lost in the process (of adding structure where
there might not really be one).
Do you have a more precise example of what information would be lost?
--
David FAURE, faure@kde.org, sponsored by TrollTech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).
How to write a Makefile.am for KDE/Qt code:
http://developer.kde.org/documentation/other/makefile_am_howto.html