[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in Authoritative Version of UOML-1-v1.0
I overlooked something. I noticed the duplicated lines in the PDF table of contents, reported here: http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uoml-x-comment/200809/msg00001.html I failed to notice that the duplicates are also in the .odt table of contents when the document is opened in OpenOffice.org 2.4.1. As far as I can tell, the authoritative version, http://docs.oasis-open.org/uoml-x/v1.0/cs01/uoml-part1-v1.0-cs01.odt has the defect along with the version problem that I already reported. - Dennis PS: I cannot determine when the duplication arose. Is it also in the approved Committee Specification that was created within the TC? -----Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uoml-x-comment/200809/msg00000.html Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 15:24 To: UOML-X Comment Cc: 'Mary McRae' Subject: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in Authoritative Version of UOML-1-v1.0 I am sad to report that the Editable Source (Authoritative) version of the Committee Specification is in a format that is identified as ODF 1.2, a specification that has not even reached committee draft at this point. The file has been created by a specific product (OpenOffice.org 3.0 beta) that is in beta test. The current supported version of OpenOffice.org is 2.4.1, and this version is reported as up-to-date. The OpenOffice.org site page for 3.0 beta (http://download.openoffice.org/3.0beta/) has this message: "The software is not recommended for production use at this stage. There are no guarantees. For production, use our most recent stable version." I believe that this is inappropriate as a published, authoritative edition. [ ... ]
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]