incubator-ooo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Shan Zhu <shanzh...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: [QA discuss] How to make keywords(tags) better used
Date Wed, 18 Jul 2012 09:11:48 GMT
Oh, it is okay, if there has been "ms_interoperability" already.
I talked about "interop_MSbinary" just wanted to tag all MSOffice
interoperability issues which can not be tagged by "interop_OOXML".
Now the "ms_interoperability" can do it well. So, no necessary  to change
it.

Herbert, thanks a lot.

Regards,
Shan Zhu

2012/7/16 Herbert Duerr <hdu@apache.org>

> On 13.07.2012 04:41, Shan Zhu wrote:
>
>> Perhaps, we can tag the interoperability issue about MSoffice2007 and
>> MSoffice2010 together using tag "interop_OOXML".
>>
>> 2 reasons:
>> 1. This type of issues ususally exist with files created in both of the
>> two
>> versions.
>> 2. For many sample files, especially files from the users or download from
>> website, we can not know exactly that which version of Office had been
>> used
>> to created/modified them.
>>
>
> These are good reasons and there was no opposing argument, so I assume
> that "lazy consensus" applies here: The new keyword was added.
>
>
>  PS: Another question is which tag we should used to mark the issue found
>> in
>> .xls that created by MSoffice2007/2010, even the eariler Office versions.
>> "interop_ms2003" can not cover the issue in such a scenario. Using
>> "interop_MSbinary" instead ?
>>
>
> There is a keyword named "ms_interoperability" and 758 issues are already
> flagged with it:
>   https://issues.apache.org/ooo/**buglist.cgi?keywords=ms_**
> interoperability<https://issues.apache.org/ooo/buglist.cgi?keywords=ms_interoperability>
> To make it and the new interop_OOXML symmetric and orthogonal again it
> should IMHO be renamed e.g. to interop_MSbinary. Is that what was meant?
>
> Herbert
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message