On Thursday 19 July 2012 10:40:57 Robin LaFontaine wrote:
> Questions/comments concerning the Select Committee report on Change
> Tracking
>
> 5. "GCT ... represents a great change to the ODF format. It would require
> a substantial overhead, both for XML and non-XML implementations of ODF.
> Particularly when compared to the operations proposal which we discuss
> below. The select committee cannot recommend GCT as the proposal to “fix”
> change tracking in ODF."
>
> This statement that GCT has a more substantial overhead than MCT seems to
> be a bold declaration, given that MCT is some considerable way away from
> being fully defined. Please would you add an explanation of this for the
> record as you are asking the TC to base the future direction of ODF on
> this.
>
Hi Robin
As maintainer of one of those two implementations you refer to I can tell you
that it indeed requires a substantial amount of overhead. The XML og GCT is so
intrusive (can occur everywhere) that it has completely messed up our
conversion code (as most applications we convert the XML to an internal
model).
Messed up in the sense that we find it hard to maintain our conversion code. In
fact even if the TC would select GCT we (Calligra) would remove our
implementation and so choose not to support change tracking at all. That is
how bad this experience has been.
We gave it a very fair try by implementing it and trying it out, but as I
said, because of it's very nature it's close to impossible to maintain our
regular conversion code. Sure you may claim it to be the way our code is, but
I say it's due to the fact that we need to handle CT tags everywhere.
A GCT like way of storing changes may work very well if you are just dealing
with XML. And by just XML I mean not having to convert to an internal model
and back, And by just XML I also mean just syntax and not dealing with the
semantics of XML. If we didn't have to use XML, but just dealt with any kind
of XML then indeed inline change tracking would make a lot of sense, but that
is not what ODF is.
As I said we gave it a fair try, and my conclusion is quite clear from having
tried it.
Sorry for being blunt.
Camilla Boemann
