Format internals -> content.xml

This XML snippet seems rather weird:

<text:h text:style-name="Heading_2">This is a title</text:h>
<text:p text:style-name="Text_body"/>
<text:p text:style-name="Text_body">
   This is a paragraph. The formatting information is
   in the Text_body style. The empty text:p tag above
   is a blank paragraph (an empty line).
</text:p>

Since all the elements are in the namespace referred to by the text prefix, it is unnecessary to explicitly use the prefix on the attributes as well. Is this really how OpenOffice writes the XML files? This would be the simplest and most appropriate:

<text:h style-name="Heading_2">This is a title</text:h>
<text:p style-name="Text_body"/>
<text:p style-name="Text_body">
   This is a paragraph. The formatting information is
   in the Text_body style. The empty text:p tag above
   is a blank paragraph (an empty line).
</text:p>

update - this goes for meta.xml as well.

Daniel Schierbeck 09:55, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Here’s an extract from a NeoOffice 1.2 (OO 1.1.5) which verifies the example (as to efficiency, I can’t answer that…) I created a new text document and set the first paragraph to heading 2. Line breaks in the XML are mine:

 <text:h text:style-name="Heading 2" text:level="2">This is a title</text:h>
 <text:p text:style-name="Standard"/>
 <text:p text:style-name="Standard">This is a paragraph.</text:p>

Barefootguru 18:30, 7 February 2006 (UTC)[reply]

merge with OpenDocument/Specifications

A sub-article in the main article OpenDocument/Specifications may do the job of keeping the main article within reasonable size. Louie 19:13, 29 May 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Page name

This page was moved from OpenDocument technical specifications to OpenDocument Specification without any discussion, as far as I can tell. I think the new name is vaguer and does not conform to the MoS. Wmahan . 18:01, 1 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for fixing it (it's OpenDocument technical specification now). Wmahan . 19:26, 3 June 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Not enough context?

Does anyone know why this article was tagged as such? Shinobu 07:06, 2 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Please work from the spec.

I've changed a number of details on this page; one of which was out-of-date, but the rest of which were factual errors. Please base comments about OpenDocument on the standards document itself, rather than the output of OpenOffice.org, wherever possible. AlexHudson 10:42, 26 July 2006 (UTC)[reply]