Bruce D'Arcus is on the right track, I think. The missing piece of the puzzle might be an (export XSLT) GRDDL Transform.
http://www.w3.org/TR/grddl-scenarios/ If you look at the examples you will see that you would be able to embed RDF in OO ODT (ODF) in such a way that style and content are co-resident. This would give you a WYSIWYG display of ODF (for reading) and the export, a RDF file (for automation). If you just want to read, make a PDF. --Gannon --- Kay Hayen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hello Bruce, > > thanks for the reply: > > > > That's obvious to us at least. We want a two way process, where > we have > > > "Test Script" writer documents and XML test scripts, where you > can create > > > one from another. Think of the writer document as a rich > annotated form, > > > where things can be bold, footnoted, etc. free form WYSIWYG (ODF > format > > > is supposed to translate that, right?). > > > > I'm still having a hard time understanding the use case. What kind > of > > content are the users dealing with? > > In our test scripts, we have a test name, a revision number, a date, > an > author, the basic things, mostly stuff that should get a layout > automatically > via fields. > > Further we have references to requirements in other documents which > the test > covers. For these we must later build table mapping tests to > requirements. > > Then we have test steps, some of which have one or more standard form > of > execution that could be pointed to in footnotes or text. > > And we have expected results for each test step. Ideally such a > result will > refer clearly to an observation made and named in one of the test > steps, or > to simply the output as must be expected from requirements. Like > starting the > system, leads to the system actually starting. > > We have systems that automate test executions, and systems that > automate test > creation. We have users that need to do special stuff, that only free > text > can explain. We will always want to include nice tables with expected > > results, corporate identity, and stuff. And we have important use > cases, > where for fabric acceptance testing, massive amounts of tests must be > copied > together into one document, and presented as such to customers, > together with > documents that detail statistics, etc. > > For the automation to work nicely with the users, a common, identical > file > format must be created. We thought this should be XML. Imagine our > surprise > to discover that at least MS Word which outputs terrible-but-still > XML will > play absolutely nice with our schema. Imagine my complete surprise > that OOs > won't (yet?). > > > Some of this "custom schema" sort of stuff might be covered by the > new > > metadqta support in ODF 1.2. There you can attach RDF statements to > > pretty much any content node, including a new generic field. > > This meta data stuff sounds like inventing the ability to attach > things. But I > don't really want any of our tools to actually deal with ODF itself. > Our > schema is to be understood or generated, and that should be it. A > step that > would translate would introduce loss. Any tool of ours to work on the > test > scripts should "only" be able to ignore the ODF tags and keep them > intact, et > voila, everything would be fine. > > > But a) as I said, I'm not sure of your use case, so it might not be > > relevant, and b) ODF 1.2 isn't yet implemented. > > See it this way: Our approach doesn't mind of it's WordML (Office > 2003 XML) or > OOXML or ODF 1.0, 1.1, 1.2 or anything else that is mixed in. It > should be > considered a good thing. > > Another topic is of course, if it makes sense for OOo to read, > present and > edit beyond the ODF schema. I think it does. > > Yours, > Kay > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ____________________________________________________________________________________ Boardwalk for $500? In 2007? Ha! Play Monopoly Here and Now (it's updated for today's economy) at Yahoo! Games. http://get.games.yahoo.com/proddesc?gamekey=monopolyherenow --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
