Would something like this give us the benefits of both approaches:
1) Specify the complete DeltaXML generic proposal, but in its own separate
"part" of the standard.
2) Then in the conformance clause for ODF, reference a subset of these
capabilities for use in conforming ODF documents. For example, we could
enumerate the specific places in ODF where the change tracking is allowed.
Maybe schema annotations could be used for this.
3) In "extended ODF documents" allow the unconstrainted general use of the
change tracking features.
This matches how we treat extensibility in ODF 1.2. We have an unlimited
extensibility mechanism (foreign elements) that is difficult for any
processor to handle in a generic way. But this is only allowed in
extended documents. For non-extended documents we allow only specific
kinds of extensions, e.g., RDF metadata, application settings, etc.
-Rob
Thorsten Behrens <> wrote on 04/04/2011 04:50:16 PM:
