Peter / All,

sorry if I jumped in too soon (or the wrong place).
I've added a link to the issues for ODF 1.4 here:
https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/ODF+1.4+Changes

On 2026/06/19 04:50:15 [email protected] wrote:
> I started to add a link for 1.4. So we can work on clustering the 
> entries for ODF 1.4
> 
> @Damjan: how did you cluster the ODF 1.3 issues? Did you wage them by 
> overall content or is there a field which helped?
> 
> If anyone wants to help please join. It is really only reading the 
> document. You can ask question here. AI is able to help to answer your 
> questions too.
> 
> Am 13.06.2026 um 08:13 schrieb [email protected]:
> >
> > Am 12.06.2026 um 06:58 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> >> On Wed, Jun 10, 2026 at 10:07 PM <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Am 10.06.2026 um 19:30 schrieb Damjan Jovanovic:
> >>>> On Wed, Jan 10, 2024 at 7:36 AM Damjan Jovanovic <[email protected]>
> >>> wrote:
> >>>>> Hi
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've started looking at how to add ODF 1.3 support to OpenOffice.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If you scroll to the end of the monstrously long part 3 of the ODF 
> >>>>> 1.3
> >>>>> specification at
> >>>>>
> >>> https://docs.oasis-open.org/office/OpenDocument/v1.3/os/part3-schema/OpenDocument-v1.3-os-part3-schema.html
> >>>  
> >>>
> >>>>> where you'll see "Appendix G: Changes From ODF 1.2 (Non Normative)".
> >>>>> Then examine:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> "Document Fields – General 7.3.1 Office-3783"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> and you follow that link to "Office-3783" and have a read, you'll see
> >>> that
> >>>>> all it does is *fix a typo*:
> >>>>> Section 7.3.1 used to contain "OpenDocument fields display 
> >>>>> information
> >>>>> about the current document or about a specific part of the current
> >>>>> document.," - note the superfluous comma at the end - and now ends
> >>>>> without that comma!
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So that item can immediately be ticked off as completed, because 
> >>>>> there
> >>> is
> >>>>> nothing we have to do.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The same is also true for at least:
> >>>>> "table:table-background 19.733 Office-3954"
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And:
> >>>>> "Normative References 1.3 Office-3868"
> >>>>> updates the <manifest:media-type> tag to refer to RFC6838 instead 
> >>>>> of the
> >>>>> older RFC4288, which also might require no work to implement.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> So what we need is a table in our Wiki, with all "Changes From ODF 
> >>>>> 1.2"
> >>>>> items from all the 1.3 documents (there's several), and then to read
> >>> over
> >>>>> them and mark off the ones that are irrelevant or complete, and track
> >>>>> progress on the other items where we do have some development to 
> >>>>> do on
> >>> our
> >>>>> side.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Can someone please create such a Wiki page, or give me access to 
> >>>>> do so?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> And out of interest, how do you find how and where we use an XML 
> >>>>> element
> >>>>> or attribute? For example let's examine:
> >>>>> <draw:applet> 10.4.7 Office-2044
> >>>>> which is deprecated by ODF 1.3.
> >>>>> First remember our XML parsing doesn't work on strings, that would be
> >>> too
> >>>>> slow. Rather strings are converted to unique integers, and then we do
> >>> fast
> >>>>> integer comparisons.
> >>>>> So if you go to main/xmloff and "grep applet * -R" you'll see:
> >>>>> source/core/xmltoken.cxx:        TOKEN( "applet",
> >>>>>    XML_APPLET ),
> >>>>> where XML_APPLET is an integer constant (from an enum) that the 
> >>>>> "applet"
> >>>>> element will be converted to.
> >>>>> Then go to OpenGrok and do a "Full Search" for "XML_APPLET", and 
> >>>>> you can
> >>>>> see where that's used.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I've also created a local odf-1.3 Git branch for any development, 
> >>>>> but at
> >>>>> present it only has 1 small patch to stop the version upgrade 
> >>>>> warning:
> >>>>>
> >>>>> ---snip---
> >>>>> diff --git a/main/sfx2/source/doc/objstor.cxx
> >>>>> b/main/sfx2/source/doc/objstor.cxx
> >>>>> index d794747b60..89ab8e1ca3 100644
> >>>>> --- a/main/sfx2/source/doc/objstor.cxx
> >>>>> +++ b/main/sfx2/source/doc/objstor.cxx
> >>>>> @@ -856,8 +856,8 @@ sal_Bool SfxObjectShell::DoLoad( SfxMedium 
> >>>>> *pMed )
> >>>>>                    if ( sVersion.getLength() )
> >>>>>                    {
> >>>>>                        double nVersion = sVersion.toDouble();
> >>>>> -                    if ( nVersion > 1.20001 &&
> >>>>> SfxObjectShell_Impl::NeedsOfficeUpdateDialog() )
> >>>>> -                        // ODF version greater than 1.2 - added some
> >>>>> decimal places to be safe against floating point conversion errors
> >>> (hack)
> >>>>> +                    if ( nVersion > 1.30001  &&
> >>>>> SfxObjectShell_Impl::NeedsOfficeUpdateDialog() )
> >>>>> +                        // ODF version greater than 1.3 - added some
> >>>>> decimal places to be safe against floating point conversion errors
> >>> (hack)
> >>>>>                        {
> >>>>>                            ::rtl::OUString sDocumentURL(
> >>>>> pMedium->GetOrigURL() );
> >>>>>                            ::rtl::OUString aSystemFileURL;
> >>>>> ---snip---
> >>>>>
> >>>>> If others want to help, I'd rather push that branch upstream soon, 
> >>>>> so we
> >>>>> can work on it together?
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Regards
> >>>>> Damjan
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>> I've now closed a total of 64 of the 190 ODF 1.3 changes (33.68%) on
> >>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/ODF+1.3+Changes.
> >>>>
> >>>> It was mostly done by finding the ones that were documentation fixes
> >>> (typos
> >>>> and description improvements), or that we currently already implement,
> >>> and
> >>>> closing them off without any code changes. This is easy and doesn't
> >>> require
> >>>> much knowledge or technical skill, so please join in if you can.
> >>> i join the effort. I try to add comment if we have a gap.
> >>>
> >> Thank you so much.
> >>
> >> With Peter's help, we are now at 43.68% completion :-).
> > :-)
> >>
> >> I was also thinking that since we want to support both ODF 1.3 and 1.4,
> >> there might be a way to develop them both faster. If we focus only on 
> >> ODF
> >> 1.3, and ignore 1.4, then by the time we finish 1.3 we will have 
> >> forgotten
> >> a lot of the code changes, and developing 1.4 will require more time. 
> >> But
> >> we could also divide up the total work by feature category, and do 
> >> what is
> >> effectively a depth-first traversal, developing each feature category 
> >> for
> >> both versions together before moving onto the next feature category.
> > +1
> >>
> >> For example ODF 1.3 has changes to the "number" namespace: we need to
> >> implement number:fill-character, number:forced-exponent-sign,
> >> number:min-decimal-places, etc., and ODF 1.4 also has changes to the
> >> "number" namespace: number:calendar, number:num-list-format, and
> >> number:num-list-label. If someone starts developing number changes 
> >> for ODF
> >> 1.3, then jumps to 1.3 formula development, 1.3 chart changes, 1.3 style
> >> changes, etc., then by the time 1.3 is finished, they would have 
> >> forgotten
> >> a lot about numbers, and developing 1.4 number changes will be more
> >> difficult and take longer. But developing all the number changes for 
> >> both
> >> 1.3 and 1.4 at the same time, before moving onto another topic, 
> >> allows them
> >> to specialize in numbers, go deeper into numbers, understand them 
> >> more, and
> >> will probably increase development efficiency, decrease bugs, and may 
> >> even
> >> discover and fix other bugs.
> >>
> >> We are late to ODF 1.3/1.4 development, but that also lets us benefit 
> >> from
> >> second-mover advantages, including the existence of many ODF 1.3/1.4
> >> implementations we can test against, and a better view of the whole
> >> landscape which lets us decrease development effort.
> >
> > Renate has offered help to clarify if we have questions.
> >
> > We had an exchange discussion with Svante pre corona. (thanks to 
> > michael) I believe he is open if we have questions too.
> >
> > I am not sure, but I think Svante said that on OASIS level a test tool 
> > has been build. Maybe we can utilize that for testing. (if my memory 
> > does not betray me)
> >
> >>
> >> Regards
> >> Damjan
> >
> > All the best
> >
> > peter
> >
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
> 
> 

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]

Reply via email to