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] ODF 1.2 Single-Level Conformance and Floor << Ceiling Already

"Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org> wrote on 02/03/2009 
06:23:34 PM:
> Please respond to dennis.hamilton
> I think messing with the ceiling doesn't accomplish anything.  Doing
> something about the floor matters far more for the achievement of
> interoperability and will have more bang for the buck. 
> Whether it takes more work or not, I am not sure, but I think that is 
> more valuable to invest in than the current effort to lower the ceiling. 
> I also think that having a strict schema and strict conformance as a
> normative case (separate from the ceiling) will do far more as a single 
> than anything about the ceiling.
> I do not propose to do nothing. I propose to do something where it will 
> the most good and be the simplest direct improvement we can make without
> breaking the provisions of earlier versions that were apparently made 
> intentionally.  I don't think we should revoke that provision until we 
> had time to see how strict conformance and greater support for
> interoperability work out.


I'll agree with you on this.  No document existing today will see its 
interoperability improved by this conformance change.  In fact, no ODF 
document will see its interoperability improve by any change made in ODF 
1.2.  Why?  Because all documents that exist today are based on ODF 1.0, 
ODF 1.1 or draft versions of ODF 1.2.  ODF 1.2 cannot retroactively change 
existing documents. 

However, the proliferation of arbitrary proprietary extensions in ODF 1.2 
documents, if and when they occur, will certainly create even greater 
interoperability problems.  I don't see how you can fail to acknowledge 
that.  Your counter argument seems to be "Don't bother locking the gun 
case because there are knives everywhere".  To that I'd say, let's lock 
the gun case and put the knives away safely.  Certainly doing one without 
the other does not accomplish everything, but we need to start somewhere 
and every bit helps.   I haven't heard a plausible argument from you on 
what harm is caused by disallowing arbitrary extensions in conformant 


>  - Dennis 
> -----Original Message-----
> From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com [mailto:robert_weir@us.ibm.com] 
> http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200901/msg00154.html
> Sent: Tuesday, January 20, 2009 06:00
> To: dennis.hamilton@acm.org
> Cc: Bart Hanssens; office@lists.oasis-open.org
> Subject: RE: [office] ODF 1.2 Single-Level Conformance and Floor << 
> Already
> This is irrelevant to the topic at hand, I believe.  If I'm reading you 
> correctly (and maybe I'm missing something) you are arguing that we 
> not bother fixing this area of ODF because there are other parts that 
> also poorly written. But the fact that there are other areas which need 
> conformance work in ODF is not incompatible with concerns about ODF's 
> current open content model.  The inability to do everything is no excuse 

> for doing nothing. 
> [ ... ]

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