[ODFPlugtest] writing implementation specific defaults

[Andreas J. Guelzow]

On Thu, 2009-06-18 at 13:03 +0200, Wouter van Vugt wrote:
> I don't really care about samples. The TC can figure that out.
> 
> The point is more that implementers should *not* do something. And that
> is that they should not say 'hey, this document is in A4, that's our app
> default, so let's not store that information in the document itself'. As
> long as we all do not say that, documents should not be different when
> opened here or there or anywhere. Since all the vital layout information
> can either be found in the spec, or in the document. Together they
> should cover 100%.

But for some types of documents the layout probably should change, as
long as the content doesn't. If a German colleague writes a document on
what is likely A4 paper then when I print it I want it do adjust itself.
There is no way that the document can look the same on letter paper as
on A4. And when I read it on screen I may want it in some third layout.

Of course, the creator should  have the choice to freeze the format, bu
that is up to the application s/he uses to create the document. It
should give him/her the choice of using the default or setting a
specific size. So even in an A4 environment there should be a page zize
of default and one of A4 and they should behave differently. (The former
not being written to teh file, while the latter is.)


> The reason that we have this discussion is that this is what
> implementers are currently not doing. Currently, the information is not
> persisted, so we all have different *application* defaults. Hence,
> rendering quirks occur in normal views.
> 
> Does that clarify it to a degree that we can all agree this is the way
> to move forward?
> Sensible defaults --> define in spec
> Or --> always store in document
> 
> That's it, plain, simple, I like it!

I don't.

> 
> Then there is the second story of wanting to *view* a document in other
> apps like on your telephone. In which case the document might need a
> change of layout. However, that is an application feature. We cannot
> expect the ODF spec to cover how dynamic layout should occur. If I place
> an image 20 centimeters from the left border, that was my intention and
> I very much hope that someone in China sees it in that exact location
> too. Except when they open a similar view to the MS Office 2k7 Full
> Screen Reading layout. In that case the user expresses the intent of
> changing layout for improved readability, and hence layout quirks are
> acceptable. 

And by the same token I should have the choice of placing the image
somewhere on the page and I don't care where. If you don't like what
your application is allowing you to do, use a different one. The
standard gives applications the freedom to include thaose defaults or
not.

Andreas
> 
-- 
Andreas J. Guelzow <aguelzow at pyrshep.ca>