OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

On Friday 17 February 2006, Lars Oppermann wrote:
> Topic: Drawing page names
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200601/msg00052.html
> 
> The spec. has a uniqueness requirement for the name of a draw:page
> Although a non-unique page (or slide) name might be a bad choice when 
> building accessible documents, it does not make sense to enforce this in 
>   normative part of the specification.
> A user should be able to name pages as he sees fit. There are other ways 
> of uniquely identifying a page (e.g. pagenumber+name)
> Unless the A11Y SC disagrees this constraint will be dropped from the spec.
> Action: Michael to check with ASC and write errata if no objection

It was brought to my attention that the resolution of this topic is still pending.
The spec still says "the name must be unique".
However I don't think that simply removing the unicity constraint solves the problem.
It means that "draw:name is the name that the user can see", but it doesn't solve
the heart of the issue which is: how to refer to pages from 

Hi David,

thanks for bringing this topic to our attention again. I have asked 
Christian Lippka, who is from the OOo graphics team, for his opinion. 
That's what he thinks:

> I also prefer solution A but using xml:id as a unique identifier for pages.
> This is also needed for the meta-data proposal.
> 
> Attribute draw:id should be deprecated (not used anyway) and.
> 
> In the same instance we should also add xml:id to shapes so they can be
> identified  uniquely too. 

To me, that sounds reasonable.

Best regards

Michael



David Faure wrote:
> On Friday 17 February 2006, Lars Oppermann wrote:
>> Topic: Drawing page names
>> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200601/msg00052.html
>>
>> The spec. has a uniqueness requirement for the name of a draw:page
>> Although a non-unique page (or slide) name might be a bad choice when 
>> building accessible documents, it does not make sense to enforce this in 
>>   normative part of the specification.
>> A user should be able to name pages as he sees fit. There are other ways 
>> of uniquely identifying a page (e.g. pagenumber+name)
>> Unless the A11Y SC disagrees this constraint will be dropped from the spec.
>> Action: Michael to check with ASC and write errata if no objection
> 
> It was brought to my attention that the resolution of this topic is still pending.
> The spec still says "the name must be unique".
> However I don't think that simply removing the unicity constraint solves the problem.
> It means that "draw:name is the name that the user can see", but it doesn't solve
> the heart of the issue which is: how to refer to pages from 

Hi,

I have discussed the results of our discussion in the last TC call with 
Christian. He suggests that we adapt solution B (the draw:display-name) 
a little, and add 

Makes sense for me.

Matches well with what we have for shapes, and the mapping for
Accessibility API.

BTW - I propose to have the same for sheets in a spreadsheet:
- Same features for Accessible Name/Description
- Sheet names have much more restrictions because of macro access, so
via the Title people can give them names they otherwise can't.

Malte.

Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote, On 10/26/07 14:11:
> Hi,
> 
> I have discussed the results of our discussion in the last TC call with 
> Christian. He suggests that we adapt solution B (the draw:display-name) 
> a little, and add 

Hi,

while integrating this proposal into the specification, I noticed that 
it would cause an inconsistency for tables:

Tables are not per se graphical objects, so it seems a little bit 
uncommon to add svg elements to them. We had a similar situation for 
hyperlinks, where we use an "office:title" attribute instead. I 
therefore suggest that we reuse the office:title attribute for tables, 
and add an office:desc attribute, too.

I further suggest that specify that the two attributes are ignored, if 
the table element is a child of an draw:frame element, because in this 
situation, the frame itself has a title and a description.

The inconsistency does not effect the drawing pages.

Michael




Malte Timmermann wrote:
> Makes sense for me.
> 
> Matches well with what we have for shapes, and the mapping for
> Accessibility API.
> 
> BTW - I propose to have the same for sheets in a spreadsheet:
> - Same features for Accessible Name/Description
> - Sheet names have much more restrictions because of macro access, so
> via the Title people can give them names they otherwise can't.
> 
> Malte.
> 
> Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote, On 10/26/07 14:11:
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have discussed the results of our discussion in the last TC call with 
>> Christian. He suggests that we adapt solution B (the draw:display-name) 
>> a little, and add 

Dear TC members,

below proposal is one of the last two which I have not integrated into
the ODF 1.2 specification part 1 so far (there are a few more that I did
not integrate, but these are changes to part 3).

The proposal was to add 

Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:

> Do we need title and description for 

Dear TC members,

below proposal is one of the last two which I have not integrated into
the ODF 1.2 specification part 1 so far (there are a few more that I did
not integrate, but these are changes to part 3).

The proposal was to add