If you look at section 2.15 in part 4 of the spec, you'll see that there are almost 400 pages of documentation covering 206 elements. I still remember when we first started the documentation of that section. We knew it would be tedious, but the more annoying part was that a good portion of it was for legacy functionality that we would have much rather just left out of the spec. In fact, in Word 2007, when you take a .doc file and upgrade it to .docx we ask you if we can do a full upgrade so that all of those legacy settings are removed.
Unfortunately for us, there was a legacy base of billions of documents out there, and many of them had one or more of these settings. For the same reason we had to give the user the option of doing a full upgrade to remove the legacy settings rather than just doing it automatically, we had to include it in the file format. So rather than just trying to sweep it under the carpet, we embarked on investigating and trying to understand as much as we could about what each of those legacy settings meant.
Bref, il fallait garder un moyen de representer cela histoire que les anciens softs puissent le traiter correctement, alors que cela n'a rien a voir dans la spec.
Si j'ai juste, sa m'inquiete car je trouve sa assez malsain de se trimballer les «tares» originelles ; je ne crois pas qu'a moyen ou long terme, ce soit une solution raisonnable.
Ils ne trimballent rien, c'est pour compatibilite descendante uniquement, c'est totalement optionel et aucun soft nouveau ne generera ces elements(Word 2007 ne le fait pas), resultat tout document cree avec un soft recent sera lu parfaitement normalement par tout soft supportant OpenXML
[^] # Re: questions...
Posté par pasBill pasGates . En réponse à la dépêche Normalisation de l'OOXML par l'ISO freinée par les États-Unis. Évalué à 2.
cf. http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/09/specify(...)
If you look at section 2.15 in part 4 of the spec, you'll see that there are almost 400 pages of documentation covering 206 elements. I still remember when we first started the documentation of that section. We knew it would be tedious, but the more annoying part was that a good portion of it was for legacy functionality that we would have much rather just left out of the spec. In fact, in Word 2007, when you take a .doc file and upgrade it to .docx we ask you if we can do a full upgrade so that all of those legacy settings are removed.
Unfortunately for us, there was a legacy base of billions of documents out there, and many of them had one or more of these settings. For the same reason we had to give the user the option of doing a full upgrade to remove the legacy settings rather than just doing it automatically, we had to include it in the file format. So rather than just trying to sweep it under the carpet, we embarked on investigating and trying to understand as much as we could about what each of those legacy settings meant.
Bref, il fallait garder un moyen de representer cela histoire que les anciens softs puissent le traiter correctement, alors que cela n'a rien a voir dans la spec.
Si j'ai juste, sa m'inquiete car je trouve sa assez malsain de se trimballer les «tares» originelles ; je ne crois pas qu'a moyen ou long terme, ce soit une solution raisonnable.
Ils ne trimballent rien, c'est pour compatibilite descendante uniquement, c'est totalement optionel et aucun soft nouveau ne generera ces elements(Word 2007 ne le fait pas), resultat tout document cree avec un soft recent sera lu parfaitement normalement par tout soft supportant OpenXML