OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office-comment message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [office-comment] Committee Draft 01 of ODF 1.2: Formula specification missing (change of modal verb and conformance requirement)

Hi Rob,

Thank you for your prompt reply,

2009/2/23  <robert_weir@us.ibm.com>:
> Jesper Lund Stocholm <4a4553504552@gmail.com> wrote on 02/23/2009 03:26:58

>> I believe the word "should" must be replaced with "shall". Having
>> unqualified formulas does not make any sense in this highly critical
>> area of spreadsheet usage.
> I agree.  We did have such language in an earlier iteration of the draft.
> However, one member was uncomfortable having that forward reference to
> OpenFormula until we had that Part edited and ready for approval as well.
> So we'll finish editing OpenFormula first and then add the appropriate
> language to 18.648.


>> Q: Is it the intention to have OOF ready for Part 2 for approval of ODF
> 1.2?
> Yes.  We might do the OASIS public review of the parts independently, to
> make the best use of time.   That way we can finish editing one part while
> the review of the other parts are still being edited.  However, the intent
> is to approve all the parts at the same time, since they are all integral
> parts of ODF 1.2.


>> If so, the namespace of
>> "urn:oasis:names:tc:opendocument:xmlns:openformula:1.0" should be
>> added to the list of known namespaces in section 1.3 thereby making it
>> the conformant way of specifying formulae in ODF 1.2.
> Yes.


>> If OOF will not be ready for ODF 1.2 approval, I think the only viable
>> option is to include the way of IS29500 as the conformant way of doing
>> formulas in ODF 1.2. I don't think there is a namespace currently in
>> use for spreadsheet formulae in IS29500, but I am sure WG4 will be
>> helpful with registering one for this purpose.
> OpenFormula was created with the intent of having it be the value of
> table:formula.  That's why we created the Formula Subcommittee, and that
> is what its charter called for it to do.   I have not heard anyone on the
> TC request recognition for any other formula languages in ODF.  This is
> not surprising, since OpenFormula was created by looking at the formula
> languages used by all of the vendors, OpenOffice, Gnumeric, KSpread,
> Quattro Pro, Excel, 1-2-3, etc.  So most of the vendors are already "on
> board" for OpenFormula and have been since the start.

I agree and I'd much prefer having OOO as formula definition than the
one from IS29500. As you put it that you will finish OOF in a timely
fashion to be included as a reference in ODF 1.2, it makes my point
about adding formula spec from IS29500, well, 'moot'. My fear was that
OOF would not be finished in time and that ODF 1.2 would also be
without formula specification. In that case I'd prefer you used
IS29500 formulas instead of none.

As you put it yourself, "using stuff outside of the spec is a nuclear
death ray to interop" (my paraphrasing of your words).


Jesper Lund Stocholm
SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]