-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 3
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Checklist of ODF 1.3 CS02 Enhancements #21
Comments
Not only should the text use (and highlight) the ISO keywords correctly, but should avoid alternative words that are deprecated by the ISO/IEC Directives Part 2. Thus, for example, in section 3.7, step 12, the use of “must” in the last sentence is deprecated, so should be replaced by “shall”. But do we want to check all ISO keywords in Parts 3 Schema and 4 Formula? This is a big task (Patrick and I started work on this some weeks ago) and I would have thought it could be postponed to ODF 1.4. |
Francis I'm not sure about the highlighting of ISO keywords. The latest version of ISO/IEC Directives Part 2, https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=4230456&objAction=browse&sort=subtype (8th edition), reserves bold for preferred terms. Section 7. Yes to correctiong "must" in part 2, Section 3.7, step 12; part 3, Annex D, D.3; part 4, 3.4, 11. I didn't find any other uses of must. |
Patrick, you're right to pick me up on this. I was using the term "highlighting" loosely. What I think is useful - I have found it useful - is to have the ISO keywords styled with the named character style 'ISO Keyword', so that it is easy to find all instances to verify that the terms are being used correctly. I should therefore have said "style" rather than "highlight". I should stress that this does not mean that the ISO keywords would be distinctively styled in typographic terms in the final published text. As you rightly point out, ISO house style in effect forbids this. But don't get me started on ISO house style... [in many respects they're living in the stone age]. |
Seems I am not able to access the ISO/IEC Directives. The exchange of words within our normative parts might be able to be automated, but I agree we should move as much as possible into ODF 1.4. |
The ISO/IEC Directives and other related resources can be found here. ISO are less strict with PAS submissions than they are with standards developed by ISO and IEC committees. The current specifications are pretty close. |
Thanks, I just realized my browser used by default my CEN account, which
strangely did not work, although available for everyone else.
Using a different browser worked.
Am Sa., 15. Aug. 2020 um 21:59 Uhr schrieb Francis Cave <
[email protected]>:
… The ISO/IEC Directives and other related resources can be found here
<https://isotc.iso.org/livelink/livelink?func=ll&objId=4230450&objAction=browse&sort=name&viewType=1>
.
ISO are less strict with PAS submissions than they are with standards
developed by ISO and IEC committees. The current specifications are pretty
close.
—
You are receiving this because you were assigned.
Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub
<#21 (comment)>,
or unsubscribe
<https://github.com/notifications/unsubscribe-auth/AAGJNW3FMOJ3Q6MN3APATVTSA3SJVANCNFSM4P7V5WUA>
.
|
*** Tasks for OASIS
Further tasks & issues were moved to ODF 1.4, see #27
Regarding C7: Documentation of allowed styles:
https://github.com/oasis-tcs/odf-tc/blob/master/src/test/resources/odf1.3/tools/How_to_prepare_ODF_specification_documents.md#text-styles
Regarding C8: Test reading is easier for the "shall" setting, by opening the HTML part 2 page and change the background colour of the "ISO Keyword" CSS style using the browser development tool (pressing F12 to open tooling).
Validation:
Note:
ODT Part 3 is invalid ODF 1.2 as TC's LibreOffice Version is using negative @fo:padding-top, only non-negative are allowed
ODT Part 3+4 are indicated as invalid as MathML has no grammar, this might be a validator issue (or LO issue)
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: