On 25/11/06, Michael Brauer <> wrote:
> >> Some notes:
> >> - In order to achieve that ODF 1.0/1.2 remain valid ODF 1.2 instances, I
> >> have kept the attribute optional in the schema. The description
> >> however states that the attribute actually is mandatory for ODF 1.2
> >> documents.
> >
> > I don't agree with keeping it optional.
> > That would imply forward compatibility, which is clearly impossible to
> > operate.
> > If that is wanted, I'd suggest wording as used in XSLT from W3C.
> > If a processor for version X meets a version >X then its response is
> > undefined.
>
> Isn't the situation I'm describing "If a processor for version X meets a
> version <X"? What I want to achieve with keeping the version attribute
> optional is that if a 1.2 processor validates a 1.0 or 1.1 document
> against the 1.2 schema, that it then does not get validation errors.
For me, asking that a 1.0 document is valid to 1.2 is not practical.
I don't want to follow what M$ do.
If a 1.0 ODF document had the version, I could 'transform' it into 1.2
(maybe), then work with it.
This is exactly the reason that it should not be optional Michael.
So that a processor knows what to do with a 'different' version to the one
it is expecting.
If no version is present, how can I guess what verison it is?
regards
--
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk
