Re: [office-comment] cd02 -- 1.4.3.2 "intentionally"

[jose lorenzo <hozelda@yahoo.com>]

--- On Mon, 5/18/09, marbux <marbux@gmail.com> wrote:

> From: marbux <marbux@gmail.com>
> Subject: [office-comment] cd02 -- 1.4.3.2 "intentionally"
> To: "office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org" <office-comment@lists.oasis-open.org>
> Date: Monday, May 18, 2009, 5:23 AM
> 1.4.3.2:
> 
> (G1) A Conforming OpenDocument extended producer is a
> program that
> creates at least one conforming OpenDocument extended
> document, and
> that meets the following additional requirements:
> 
> (G1.1) It shall not *intentionally* create any
> non-conforming
> OpenDocument extended documents of any kind.
> 
> * * * * *
> 
> Intent is a mental state of a living organism. Programs in
> the sense
> intended have no intent. They are algorithms executed by a
> computing
> device. The use of "intentionally" makes no sense in
> context because
> programs that intend to create non-conforming documents can
> only be a
> null set. Developers may have intent but programs do not.
> 
> Fix it, please.

There appears to be support missing for this "feature" of the spec [or so I will guess].

"Intent" might acquire relevant meaning within the context of a certification authority that requires that, in order to maintain X certification, that, within a certain amount of time after being officially brought to the attention of the body and vendor, product "bugs" (violations) be "fixed" and that such fixes be advertised in some prescribed manner and be made freely available. "Intent not to violate" would thus be acknowledged by the response of the certified products vendor to correct in a timely manner bugs brought to its attention.

In this case, "intentionally" sections might eventually be used to cue in such "certification requirements".

If "intentionally" was intended as just described, perhaps this word can be defined or changed to something else. Maybe also define "application versions", "vendor", "vendor intent", etc.