OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

 View Only
  • 1.  Different relative size relations - Office-3854

    Posted 05-26-2018 21:32
    Regina, It was in response to this issue that you began drafting the page layout terminology, to improve our descriptions here and elsewhere in ODF. https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3854 I realize we have turned aside to other issues and am wondering if realistically we can review and approve the page layout terminology for ODF 1.3? Or will that degree of clarity have to wait for the next version? Realizing it isn't simply approving a consistent terminology but then integrating it into the current text. Thanks! Hope you are having a great weekend! Patrick -- 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


  • 2.  Re: [office] Different relative size relations - Office-3854

    Posted 05-26-2018 22:56
    Hi Patrick, Patrick Durusau schrieb am 26.05.2018 um 23:31: Regina, It was in response to this issue that you began drafting the page layout terminology, to improve our descriptions here and elsewhere in ODF. https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3854 I realize we have turned aside to other issues and am wondering if realistically we can review and approve the page layout terminology for ODF 1.3? Or will that degree of clarity have to wait for the next version? Realizing it isn't simply approving a consistent terminology but then integrating it into the current text. My proposal for issue OFFICE-3854 is attached to my e-mail of 12.03.2018. The proposal is complete besides the fact, that it refers to the terminology document in two places as "The mentioned areas are illustrated in NN." Do you think, that the text is exact enough without the illustrations and do we agree on the term "content-area"? We have not yet discussed my proposal. I think, that we do not get the complete illustration-document discussed in time. There are not only terms to be discussed, but there are problems in regard of width and height. For example, does svg:width of a draw:frame include border and padding, which are defined in the frame style? Or does svg:width of a frame gives the width of the content-area, which e.g might be filled by an image? And the behavior of margin, border, padding and shadow of characters (=OFFICE-3873) is unsolved. There the problem is, that CSS (used in HTML and EPUB) is different from the behavior of Word and therefore a simple reference to CSS is not usable, but we need an own specification and illustration. Kind regards Regina


  • 3.  Re: [office] Different relative size relations - Office-3854

    Posted 05-27-2018 00:46
    Regina, Thanks for the quick response! After reading your proposal of 12.03.2018, it certainly is clearer than the present text and removing the references to NN won't detract from that. By separate email, I will ask the TC for approval of your proposal, minus The mentioned areas are illustrated in NN . x 2 and, suggesting as an alternative to environment --- context reasoning that the rules vary depending upon the context of the use. Hope you are having a great weekend! Patrick On 05/26/2018 06:55 PM, Regina Henschel wrote: Hi Patrick, Patrick Durusau schrieb am 26.05.2018 um 23:31: Regina, It was in response to this issue that you began drafting the page layout terminology, to improve our descriptions here and elsewhere in ODF. https://issues.oasis-open.org/browse/OFFICE-3854 I realize we have turned aside to other issues and am wondering if realistically we can review and approve the page layout terminology for ODF 1.3? Or will that degree of clarity have to wait for the next version? Realizing it isn't simply approving a consistent terminology but then integrating it into the current text. My proposal for issue OFFICE-3854 is attached to my e-mail of 12.03.2018. The proposal is complete besides the fact, that it refers to the terminology document in two places as The mentioned areas are illustrated in NN. Do you think, that the text is exact enough without the illustrations and do we agree on the term content-area ? We have not yet discussed my proposal. I think, that we do not get the complete illustration-document discussed in time. There are not only terms to be discussed, but there are problems in regard of width and height. For example, does svg:width of a draw:frame include border and padding, which are defined in the frame style? Or does svg:width of a frame gives the width of the content-area, which e.g might be filled by an image? And the behavior of margin, border, padding and shadow of characters (=OFFICE-3873) is unsolved. There the problem is, that CSS (used in HTML and EPUB) is different from the behavior of Word and therefore a simple reference to CSS is not usable, but we need an own specification and illustration. Kind regards Regina --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php -- 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