RE: [office] The Rule of Least Power

[Jomar Silva <jomar.silva@br.odfalliance.org>]

Every time I see discussions like this one I remember the good and old 
KISS methodology.

It is clear to me that we have, at least, two different user cases here, 
and we are trying to discuss them as if they are the same one.

They are:

1. Users that need to have the ability to exchange their office suite 
(or application) as they change they socks. They also need to get 
assured that anyone who need to exchange documents with them will be 
able to use any office suite too, without missing anything (features or 
data or even formating properties). For those users (typically 
governments), a "strict conformance" class is absolutely necessary (and 
I have several real world histories and use cases in Brazil to 
illustrate this scenario...).

2. Users that may have the opportunity to define (or develop) a specific 
office suite (or office application) tho their use, that will accept and 
treat some additional data inside their ODF documents, that are useful 
on their corporate environment (and may or not, be useful to others). 
Those users can easily define that Jomar's Office is the best 
application to their own needs and define that they'll only use that 
application (despite if it generate "strict" or "extended" ODF documents).

I don't think that with two conformance classes we'll be creating a 
"first" and a "second" class of documents. ODF users have different 
needs and they will "choose" the best conformance to their needs, not 
us. (I live in Brazil and it may not be the best place to live to a user 
that requires "high tech products at low price", but it is a paradise 
for a user that have as a requirement "great beaches and cold caipirinha 
!!!").

Best,

Jomar

S/MIME Cryptographic Signature