[dev] Specification Process Possibilities ...
I would like some advise about when a Specification Document should be written. I have submitted quite a few enhancement requests for Writer most of which are at status=new, some of them have an assigned owner and some are still owner=requirements. I have 22 issues and enhancements submitted, and since the first, the historic 4292, in April 2002, one enhancement, I think, has been implemented. (my list of issues - http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/buglist.cgi?issue_type=DEFECTissue_type=ENHANCEMENTissue_type=FEATUREissue_type=PATCHissue_status=NEWissue_status=STARTEDemail1=dnwemailtype1=exactemailreporter1=1email2=emailtype2=exactemailreporter2=1issueidtype=includeissue_id=changedin=votes=chfieldfrom=chfieldto=Nowchfieldvalue=short_desc=short_desc_type=allwordslong_desc=long_desc_type=allwordsissue_file_loc=issue_file_loc_type=substringstatus_whiteboard=status_whiteboard_type=substringkeywords=keywords_type=anytokensfield0-0-0=nooptype0-0-0=noopvalue0-0-0=cmdtype=doitnewqueryname=order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+timeSubmit+query=Submit+query ) It is clear that if it were decided to implement a enhancement/feature it would speed up the process if I had written a specification document before hand. But would writing the specification document increase the the chances of the enhancements being accepted ? If no one is interested in the enhancement then no one will read the specification document and it will be a wasted effort? At what point in the QA process should one feel sufficiently encouraged to start writing the specification document ? Except for the bibliographic enhancement, no has ever asked me for more information regarding an enhancement/feature I have submitted. Or would producing a specification document at the start have help to reduce years of bickering and lack of resolve around some rather simple issues like Increase some field lengths in the bibliographic database @ http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=16268 regards David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Adding a biblio data file to the .odt file
It seems that the question of adding the bibliographic reference data file in to the save package (.odt fils) is very simple- The file you add must have a properly defined namespace declaration Mathias Bauer wrote It doesn't need to be a registered Mime type, it's just anything you like. You should use reversed domain notation to have your own namespace. So a usual media type would be org.myproject.myapplication.mytype or vnd.companyname.productname.type. OOo itself uses org.openoffice or in some places vnd.sun.star. If the file does not a valid namespace declaration it is not preserved. And the file needs to be defined in the /META-INF/manifest.xml file with a line like - manifest:file-entry manifest:media-type=text/xml manifest:full-path=biblio-data.rdf/ I tested this with Bruce's data.rdf file ( which has all the proper namespace declarations) from the CiteProc examples and it survives opening, changing and saving the file. Now we just need some code to access it ... David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] A word about (missing) Specification Documents and (late) Feature Mails
On Friday 20 October 2006 7:14 am, Michael Meeks wrote: As I say, of the ~million or so users that have been exposed to the outdated help in this area, none I know of have noticed or cared enough to actually file a bug. In general people are amazed when they find a help system actually helps. The industry standard is so low that people have got used to it. I could not quickly find anything in the help about reporting problems and issues only: Getting Support You can find help and support on the OpenOffice.org website at www.openoffice.org. Perhaps if at the bottom of every help page there was a email link with Please contact us about any any problems or suggestions with this help topic. We want to make perfect.) You would get more comments. (Using the link should add the topic name and language and help version number to the email). You would get much more feedback but not at the quality of bug notice via the proper system. If you got too much email read you could still do statistical analysis on the problem topics. David --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] OOoConf2006
Bibliographic List members The Program for the OpenOffice Conference for 2006 is now published. http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2006/ Unfortunately my offer to give a presentation on the bibliographic project was not accepted. We are now trying to arrange a conference call with 'the appropriate people' in the Sun OOo team to determine the level of support for our project. I feel we need to do this for several reasons, and particularly in regards to raising funds for development work. We need some assurance that such work would, in fact, be accepted into the OpenOffice application. Regards David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Fwd: [dev-biblio] How to test for first or subsequent occrance of a citation ?
In correctly displaying citations we need a function that indicates whether a citation is the first or a subsequent citation of a reference. This is because a first or a subsequent citation often has a different display format. The xml format of a citation looks something like this - cite:citation cite:citation-source cite:biblioref cite:key=doe99a cite:style=year cite:detail cite:units=pages cite:begin=23 cite:end=24/ /cite:biblioref /cite:citation-source cite:citation-body span class=citation(1999: 23-24)/span /cite:citation-body /cite:citation The work being referred to is indicated by the cite:key, in this case doe99a. So when we add or move a citation that refers to “doe99a how do we test whether it is the first or subsequent occurrence in the text (or chapter or page depending on the options selected) ? Is there an existing code function that can do this ? Or does a new function need to be constructed ? What would be the most efficient approach? There is a cross-reference function to indicate whether a bookmark is Above/Below the current insertion point. Would it relevant to use this function in some way? Any comments or suggestions would be welcome. David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - 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]
Re: [dev] Will OOo version 3 preserve backwards file compatibility with OOo 2 ?
On Tuesday 27 June 2006 6:22 pm, Kay Ramme - Sun Germany - Hamburg wrote: Hi David, David Wilson wrote: Can anyone advise us as whether OOo version 3 will preserve backwards file compatibility with OOo 2 ? snip Does that mean, that you need the file format to become incompatible? No. I thought that support for bibliographic extensions would be optional only. In terms of the file format they would be. Older versions of Writer would just ignore the extensions. The question is how much backwards compatibility do we need to build in. In the current version of Writer every time you insert a Bibliography Entry / Citation the full set of bibliographic data (author, publisher etc.) is stored with each Entry, and no link is made with the source of the entry. The only way to correct a Bibliography Entry is to find each one and edit its data, or correct the database and reinsert the relevant Bibliography Entries. In the improved file format the Bibliographic data is stored only once and each Bibliography Entry / Citation contains a link to that data. So correction becomes easier. Links can be maintained to the originating source, such as the database, then a Update command could refresh the bibliographic data form its source. (all this explained at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Project's_Developer_Page http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer_enhancements_for_OOBib and related pages ) So our question is - do we still have to maintain all the original Bibliography Entry structures in the save file along with the new structures so the older versions of OpenOffice can still access the some of Bibliographic data content? (The new data model is richer, so not all the data can be converted to the older structures.) A flow chart of this approach is at http://bibliographic.openoffice.org/backwards.png . In this scenario the newer Bib-enhanced versions of Writer would not display the older citation and bib-table structures but only the new ones. But would continue to maintain both, as far as was possible. A simpler option to implement would be partial backwards compatibility - that the older version of Writer would just see the visible text of the Bibliography Entries but not the underlying data. Apart from the underlying data issues, we have the question of handling how the Bibliography Entries appear on the page. If we present theses in the old style bibliographic fields, and the user does selects the command Tools-Update-'All Fields' the nicely formatted Bibliography Entries are all lost had we have the old style ones regenerated. For example Our footnote citation 34. Thomas M. Charles-Edwards,Honour and status in Some Irish and Welsh Prose Tales., Eriu, xxxvi, 1978. pages 298-305 becomes 34. [Charles-Edwards-78] or 34. [23] (In fact if this footnote was inserted into a Bibliography Entry field the correct italic formatting of the Journal name 'Eriu' would be lost because fields do not support formatted text.) If we keep the Bibliography Entries as text we prevent that loss, and can have correct formatting, but at the cost of limiting the users access to the underlying data. Achieving backwards compatibility of Bibliographic Table structures, is more complex. I would think the first priority for backwards compatibility is that the user of the older version of Writer sees the very well formatted Bibliography Table generated by the enhanced version of Writer. In that case we could present the Table in a, perhaps protected, text area. If we have provided the underlying bibliographic data the user then has the option to make changes to the document, delete the Bibliography Table, and Insert a new Bibliography Table, using the older, that is the current, bibliographic formatting mechanism. However, we do not see any way in which we could transfer the table style definitions from the new to the old structures, the mechanisms being so different. The user would get the default Bibliography Table style as is now the case. So these are the trade offs we are considering. Any advice would be welcome. regards David --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Enhance the Text-Field or Bookmark functions to include formatted text
I would like to enter an issue to enhance database and text fields to support formatted text. The Bibliographic project wants this enhancement because some data fields in the bibliography need to support formatted text. For example some scientific document titles need to be able to display words in Italics. Mathematical titles need to represent equations. Currently fields can only hold unformatted text. This enhancement would would be of wider interest than just to the Bibliographic project. Oliver Specht has suggested that there are two ways in which this might be achieved - to enhance the text-field, or by enhancing bookmarks. (I have quoted his comments below.) I would like to get some discussion on this topic and to determine which is the better approach. regards David = In discussing how to achieve formatted text in fields, Oliver Specht [EMAIL PROTECTED], wrote the following - The Writer has two possible content types that could be extended to support the citation element (and other elements generically) The first is the text field (com.sun.star.text.TextField). A generic field service could be added to the API of the Writer that would have a property that contains a DOM tree. This DOM tree contains the citation-element. The bibliography creates the DOM tree of those fields and inserts them into the text together with a string that contains the presentation text. Such fields can only be formatted as a whole. It is not possible to have e.g. parts of this presentation printed in bold. This text can not be spanned over paragraphs. The text cannot be changed manually. Another possible solution is to add a new object that is similar to bookmarks (com.sun.star.text.Bookmark). This extended bookmark would also carry a DOM tree property. This 'bookmark' can span over formatted text longer than a paragraph. The user can modify the text inside of this bookmark easily. In both cases an interface to access the new elements needs to be implemented (sorted by document position). The DOM interfaces are in com.sun.star.xml.dom. (e.g. XDocument.idl, XNode.idl, XElement.idl) There's also a service com.sun.star.xml.dom.DocumentBuilder available that supports the creation of DOM trees. The bibliography component works on the DOM tree and can manipulate it independently. In case of using a field the component has to set the resulting string representation of the reference at this field. Using the field is a bit easier and using the bookmark is more powerful. This issues is also detailed at the wiki address below. The wiki page has web links to some of the relevant api and DOM descriptions. http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer_enhancements_for_OOBib#Enhanced_Field_or_Bookmark_Function_to_Include_Formatted_Text Regards David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Wiki page for Writer Enhancements desired by the Bibliographic project
The OOo Bibliographic Project has moved some its project development documentation to the wiki in order to encourage the OOo Community t0 participate in the development of the project and it's documentation. http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Project Members of this list may be interested in the wiki page Enhancements needed in Writer to support an improved Bibliographic module at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Writer_enhancements_for_OOBib Members of the OOo dev list are invited to contribute to these wiki pages, please feel free to add to or improve the documents. Or just leave your comments, or post them to dev@bibliographic.openoffice.org regards David -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [dev] I have a thought
Arnold, The Openoffice Bibliographic Project is devoted to this purpose. Regards David On Friday 03 March 2006 6:43 pm, Ronley Arnold wrote: Has anyone ever developed a software for OOO writer to insert references in MLA or APA format for university papers. I myself do not have this sort of skill to program but it would make OOO more useful to those who write papers, etc. This would get the idea of using OOO out into the professional world! - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] New FAQ and Hints and Tips on the wiki
I have added three new pages to the wiki FAQ http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_FAQ Hints and Tips http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Hints_and_Tips I have just started and put one entry on each. I invite everyone to add their own suggestions. I have also moved the 'Bibliographic Software and Standards Information' page to the wiki as it can be better maintained if users can add to and update the information themselves. http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Bibliographic_Software_and_Standards_Information regards David Wlson - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[dev] Bibliographic Project announces its development plans
The OOo Bibliographic Project (OOoBib) is pleased to announce the release of its development plans. The plans are available at http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_talk:Dnw . We have placed our plans on the wiki site as we hope developers will contribute by adding information to assist others and to add detail to the plans. Our current objective is to design and build OOoBib version 0.1, which will contain the most basic functions for an usable bibliographic facility with: 1.bibliographic formatting support for: * complex features required of commonly used citation styles like APA and Chicago * automatically switching between potentially radically different citation styles (ie. footnote to in-text) 2.a data model that can support a broader range of reference types 3.integration with remote databases We are, in fact ready to go with the first task in that plan which is to modify the Writer document-read and document-save modules to support the new OpenDocument enhanced citation format, and to implement the citation and bibliography changes to the OOo Writer save file (in Open Document format) accepted by the OpenDocument Technical Committee. OOoBib offers many interesting opportunities for developers to become involved with a range of cutting edge technologies, covering: Internet, metadata, databases, and XML XSLT and OpenOffice. Please consider if you would like to help us in the development of this exiting project. We especially need the assistance of a C++ programmer to implement the first essential changes to Writer. When these basic changes are in place we can proceed with application prototyping in OOo Basic, Java or Python. When we have designed, built and tested the prototypes and they have been accepted by the OOo community we intend to rebuild them in C++ so that they can become part of the core OpenOffice application. -- --- David N. Wilson Co-Project Lead for the Bibliographic OpenOffice Project http://bibliographic.openoffice.org - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
