[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Evolving ODF, Interop and Multiple Implementations
Am 25.10.2012 23:57, schrieb robert_weir@us.ibm.com: >> In principle parties are free to implement earlier incarnations of the >> format. > Yes. But that is not really an argument for deciding what additions we > put into ODF 1.3. You appear concerned that parties are capable to support a next gen feature set, and raise a conformance issue: "If only a single implementation will support a proposed feature, then existing extensibility mechanisms should be used." Two cases 1. Depth: Overcome underspecification, reduce ambiguity 2. Scope: Add new capabilities ad 1 no need to consider whether implementations do implement it in the same way, the revised spec, the next version, _defines_ how it is supposed to be. ad 2 here the implementation committment argument may apply. Better not mix both up. At least one party is obliged to support the ISO version. >> >> In other words, I'd like to discourage adding capabilities to ODF 1. >> >> 3 unless it promotes interoperability. >> >> Would that speed up the pace of development? >> > Development of the spec or the implementation? Spec. Best, André
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]