Re: [office-formula] Portable Documents

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

> 
> In section 2, I'm trying to understand the purpose of defining 
> "Portable Documents". Was there an earlier discussion about defining
> Portable Documents that you can point me to so I can understand the 
> goals for this topic?
> 

You have a standard, and the standard allows extensions.  Vendors A, B and 
C each implement the standard, each with their own extensions.  The only 
portable documents will be those that are limited to features defined by 
the standard, without availing themselves of extensions.  How do you write 
a standard that allows extensions, for those who wish them, while also 
defining a core set of functionality that is interoperable without 
extensions.  Nothing more to it than that.

I think we may end up harmonizing the language with similar intended 
language in the main part of ODF, where we're moving toward using the 
"strictly conforming" phrase rather than "portable". 

David Wheeler, what do you think?

-Rob