Hi David,
On 09.02.09 13:37, David Faure wrote:
> On Monday 09 February 2009, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
>> then I would have no objections to define an
>> extension mechanism there. But I would do so as feature of
>> <*-properties> elements, rather than as part of a "loose" conformance
>> definition.
>
> Sound great to me :-)
>
> I don't want "loose" conformance, I want extendable <*-properties>.
>
Do you think of something like this as part of the descriptions of
<*-properties> elements?
The <*-properties> elements may, in addition to the elements and
attributes defined by the OpenDocument schema, contain elements and
attributes not defined by the schema. These *shall not* be associated
with a namespace defined by this specification. The semantics of these
elements and attributes are implementation defined. They *shall not*
influence how the document is displayed, but *may* be evaluated when the
document is modified, for instance, when the properties of an object are
modified or new objects are inserted.
Michael
--
Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany
http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
