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


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

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

Subject: Re: [office] List Proposal Vote Deadline on Wednesday


Thomas Zander wrote:
> On Tuesday 01 May 2007 22:23:21 Gary Edwards wrote:
>> This has been a long and often contentious discussion.  It's also one
>> of the most documented discussions the TC has ever recorded.  So much
>> so that if ever the public wanted to know how things really work with
>> the ODF specification, it's here for all to see.
> I'd also like to extend the invitation to anyone that feels he needs it to 
> explain things in private mail if they so wish.
> I say this as I see a comment on the vote that raised my eyebrow this 
> morning; it says this:
>   " While i do believe that the Sun/KOffice List Enhancement proposal is 
> creative and uniquely innovative, i don't believe we get to go back to 
> square one and re invent the wheel; no matter how appealing, tempting, or 
> application benefiting that might be. These issue were easier way back 
> when, but once ODf 1.0 was released to the public, enhancements and 
> changes to the specification demand consideration of larger 
> responsibilities and expectations. The problem becomes that of doing 
> everything we can at the specification level to encourage and accommodate 
> innovative application features and advances; and do so without 
> compromising our legacy obligations."
> I can fully understand that the question before us is confusing due to the 
> many many mails on the subject.
> The choice A (sun/koffice proposal) is the result of months of work to
> a) inventorize what OOo and KO have _actually_ been doing in 1.0 and 1.1
> b) inventorize the featueset we want.
> At this point we noticed that OOo and KO both had a subset of the wanted 
> features, and did so in a non-exclusive manner (since they mostly used 
> different tags for it)
> c) write a proposal that joins the ideas of both suites (which in the end 
> we not so different) which we now see before us.

To be clear, that doesn't mean that the proposal only reflects the 
current implementations of OOo and KO.
For OOo the proposal standardized what is accurate for OOo to be 
supported in one of its next versions.

Regards, Oliver.

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