Re: kofficetests validation

On Tuesday, November 09, 2010 23:51:29 pm Sven Langkamp wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2010 at 4:08 PM, Jos van den Oever <
> 
> [email protected]> wrote:
> > On Tuesday, November 09, 2010 14:28:22 pm Cyrille Berger Skott wrote:
> > > As I have said to Inge on IRC. I would agree to treat invalid ODF as
> > > release blockers, under the following conditions:
> > > 
> > > 1) That a proper explanation on why the use of the koffice namespace is
> > > invalid is provided (while, it seems the openoffice namespace is
> > > acceptable) 2) There are people commited to fix the problems
> > 
> > I am not committed to doing the fixes, but I have put quite some effort
> > in making the errors visible. Since I'm working on entirely different
> > code atm, I
> > hope other people will have a look at the invalidly saved documents.
> > 
> > > 3) We have an easy way to get reports on the ODF validity (aka a page
> > 
> > which
> > 
> > > list which documents are saved invalid)
> > 
> > This list can be found on http://158.36.191.251:8080/overview.html
> > We're not that far off. Currently 224 out of 3026 files are invalid or
> > cause a
> > crash.
> 
> Looks to me like most of those 224 fail because there is some attribute
> with koffice namespace in it. That needs to be fix before we can really
> look at the failing ones.

If you can come up with an extended RNG that allows koffice: in specific cases 
then I'll use those to to the validation, which should remove the documents 
that are valid in the extended RNG from the error list and would also give us 
clear documentation on how we extend ODF.

Cheers,
Jos

-- 
Jos van den Oever, software architect
+49 391 25 19 15 53
http://kogmbh.com/legal/