[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [odf-adoption] ODF and UOF
Louis Suarez-Potts wrote: > > On 2009-07-07, at 13:58 , robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote: > >> Thanks for the update. >> >> If they move UOF into OASIS or ISO, then we have ways of coordinating >> with >> then at a technical level. Otherwise, it will end up being done in China >> by those companies that have staff there. > > That was my impression, too. It struck me that by keeping it in China > development and implementation by international companies would be > limited. (I repeat what you write.) China is often criticized for developing own standards, although international equivalents are available. From my point of view there are two quite reasonable aspects behind it. Developing nations, China still is to some extend, usually inherit existing standards, thus becoming dependent on technology, that did not yet consider special needs of the adopter. China in contrast creates standards, that are fixing issues of international standards. UOF is an obvious example, because it supports e.g. Chinese text flow and ideographs much better. Additionally, having own standard puts China in a position to negotiate issues on eye-level with international bodies. I could well imagine China would join OASIS or ISO to work on UOF and/or harmonizing ODF and UOF, but only on high-level invitation basis. This means the OASIS board has to officially invite the board of CESI (CHINA Electronics Standardization Institute). [...] >> But I think we're heading on the right path here. For example, Peter >> Junge has contributed a proposal to the ODF TC regarding diagonal table >> headers, a key requirement for Chinese documents. > > Right. Would this be difficult to implement in an application supporting > ODF? Ie, to generate the right content? And would this then also affect > output and thus compatibility with, for instance, MSFT Office 2003 and > beyond? In short, if we are looking for a solution to compatibility not > only with UOF but more generally with ideographic scripts, then what's > the simplest path, and would it be in addition to adding elements (but > not monstrous ones) to ODF? The diagonal table headers might be a bad example. It's not a copy of an existing feature from UOF or OOXML. Those standards basically split a cell by placing a diagonal line (as a drawing object) into it, IMHO a rudimentary solution. Our approach is quite sophisticated and is planned to be submitted both for ODF next and UOF 2.0. It is surely not interoperable with MSO 2003 or 2007 yet. > >> Maybe we make better >> Asian document support a theme of ODF-Next? > > Let's. The issue is of some urgency, in that the government *will* > insist upon the mandate, I have been told. OOo *can* and *does* support > and even implement UOF but again, I don't know with what fidelity or > conformance. Anyway, improvement is wanted. I'm still waiting to get a translation of the Chinese policies on the use of UOF. I will update you as soon as I get it. > > And having as a general goal, then, Asian script document support as the > theme for ODF-next gives us the necessary claim that should satisfy > would-be enterprises (public, private) required to use UOF. Likely having such goal would also attract Asian governments to join the ODF TC. I think we need to identify and invite stakeholders. > > I wonder if having discussions and work on the ODF Toolkit Union makes > sense? No, I think they are only using ODF. Best regards, Peter >> >> Louis.Suarez-Potts@Sun.COM wrote on 07/07/2009 10:44:53 AM: >> >>> >>> I was just in China and discussed ODF and UOF harmonization as well as >>> improved support for and implementation of UOF by OOo. At present, OOo >>> supports it and since 3.x can save in UOF but evidently only >>> imperfectly. The idea would be to improve this, in particular for >>> ideographical scripts. >>> UOF, of course, is the government-mandated format for its documents. >>> >>> So, this raises the set of questions below: >>> >>> * Status of UOF as a specification? >>> >>> From conversations with the RedOffice team and with Peter in >>> particular, UOF seems to be charging ahead and reaching 2.0. However, >>> there seems to be little movement to relocate it to Oasis or to drive >>> it to ISO standardization. Neither would directly enhance >>> interoperability with ODF but either would likely raise the >>> consciousness of the format among stakeholders. >>> >>> * Status of ODF UOF harmonization? >>> >>> And, how desirable is this? At our meetings, we discussed the >>> possibility of effectively merging the specifications, so that the >>> elements missing in ODF but present in UOF and vice versa would be >>> completed. Problem is, the basic layout of the page differs from >>> format to format, so a simple cut and paste effort is not likely. My >>> guess is that a native-code (C++) conversion might be required for this. >>> >>> This effort might also have some other consequences, as it seems as if >>> UOF is closer in its formatting logic to OOXML than ODF is. Thus, >>> compatibility with OOXML might be--I have not checked this--improved >>> by this work, providing it's reasonable. >>> >>> * Logistics of any related work? >>> >>> That is, do we (stakeholders) have a good sense of how much work >>> would be required to produce results that satisfy demanding enterprise >>> users of UOF so that they are happy (or reasonable facsimile thereof) >>> when they use OOo or its derivatives? >>> >>> Thanks >>> louis >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> http://www.robweir.com/blog/labels/UOF.html >>> >>> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >>> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >>> >> >> >> --------------------------------------------------------------------- >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that >> generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php >> > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that > generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php > -- Peter Junge Open Source Strategy Director Beijing Redflag Chinese 2000 Software Co., Ltd. Building No.2, Block A, Huilongsen, 18 Xihuan Nanlu Beijing Economic-Technological Development Area 100176 Beijing - P.R.China 北京红旗中文贰仟软件技术有限公司 地址：北京经济技术开发区（亦庄）西环南路18号汇龙森A座二层 邮编：100176 电话/Tel: +86-10-51570010 ext.6183 邮箱/e-mail： peterjunge@RedOffice.com http://www.RedOffice.com
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]