Eike,
Thanks!
Depending on what is agreed to tomorrow, I will probably do another drop
on Weds. of this week. With all these corrections present!
Hope you are at the start of a great week!
Patrick
On Mon, 2010-11-08 at 17:55 +0100, Eike Rathke wrote:
> Hi Patrick, *,
>
> I found the following typos/details in
> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part1-editor-revision_04.odt
>
>
> * 9.1.10 <table:table-column-group>
>
> The second paragraph is deleted and replaced by an insertion of the
> backspace character instead, that might should had been the Enter key
> hit ;-)
>
>
> * 9.2.5 Cell Range Address List
>
> Apparently all mentions of Unicode characters are changed to the form
> "c" (U+0099, NAME), that is missing for
> “'” (APOSTROPHE, U+0027)
> which should be
> “'” (U+0027, APOSTROPHE)
> instead.
>
>
> * 9.4.11 <table:named-expressions>
>
> Was changed to "element contains a assignments of names to
> expressions", one superfluous "a", should be "contains assignments"
> instead.
>
>
> * 9.8 <table:dde-links>
>
> Insertion of "formulas" replaces deletion of "documen", note that the
> trailing "t" was not deleted, so the new word is "formulast".
>
>
> * 19.347 number:denominator-value
>
> "to define the display a floating point number" lacks an "of", "to
> define the display of a floating point number".
>
>
> * 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
> The replacing paragraph says "Producers may add support for consumers
> that don't support the number:rfc-language-tag attribute by specifying
> number:language, number:script and number:country attributes with
> values that are implementation-dependent."
>
> That is quite contradictionary to the original and now deleted
> intention "If a fall-back is provided for consumers that do not
> support the number:rfc-language-tag attribute, producers should add
> number:language, number:script and number:country attributes whose
> values are as close as possible to the actual value of the
> number:rfc-language-tag attribute. The values of these attributes
> shall not contradict to the value of the number:rfc-language-tag
> attribute."
>
> Suggested correction:
>
> "Producers may add support for consumers that don't support the
> number:rfc-language-tag attribute by specifying number:language,
> number:script and number:country attributes with values as close as
> possible to the actual value of the number:rfc-language-tag
> attribute. Producers shall not use values for these attributes that
> contradict the value of the table:rfc-language-tag attribute."
>
>
> * 19.514 style:rfc-language-tag
>
> The same as for 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
>
> * 19.705 table:rfc-language-tag
>
> The same as for 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
> The paragraph that is deleted in the other *:rfc-language-tag
> attribute descriptions is kept intact here. Oversight?
>
>
> * 20.333 style:rfc-language-tag
>
> The same as for 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
>
> * 20.334 style:rfc-language-tag-asian
>
> The same as for 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
>
> * 20.335 style:rfc-language-tag-complex
>
> The same as for 19.358 number:rfc-language-tag
>
>
> * 19.598 table:condition
>
> "is-true-formula(expression): true if evaluation of the expression
> yields a value that converts to logical type value true in the
> semantics for the expression; false otherwise."
> is added to both, "The defined conditions are:" and "The defined value
> conditions are:"
>
> Having is-true-formula(expression) listed under both, defined
> conditions and defined value conditions, does not make sense. There is
> no difference. I propose to remove it from the defined value
> conditions and list it only under defined conditions. See
> http://tools.oasis-open.org/issues/browse/OFFICE-3493
> which I set to "edits rejected".
>
>
> Eike
>
