Hi Patrick - bounced msg below (Cc went to Robin succesfully
already, though).
Thanks for passing on, Thorsten
----- Forwarded message from Thorsten Behrens <> -----
Date: Fri, 20 Jul 2012 15:23:34 +0200
From: Thorsten Behrens <>
Subject: Re: [office] Questions/comments concerning the Select Committee report on Change Tracking
Robin LaFontaine wrote:
> 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,
representing one of the ODF consumers without an internal XML model,
I can tell you that there were grave concerns, if not for the
implementability, but at the very least for the substantial
retooling costs this would have incurred. To the point that people
were advocating to ignore this part of ODF, should it become a
standard.
Regards,
--
Thorsten Behrens
SUSE LINUX Products GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg; GF: Jeff
Hawn, Jennifer Guild, Felix Imendörffer, HRB 16746 (AG Nürnberg)
----- End forwarded message -----
