RE: [office] The Rule of Least Power

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

+1 

-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Zander [mailto:T.Zander@nokia.com] 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/office/200902/msg00192.html
Sent: Tuesday, February 17, 2009 06:18
To: office@lists.oasis-open.org
Subject: Re: [office] The Rule of Least Power

[ ... ]

You missed my point; the point is that nobody here has been able to claim why 
its an issue at all that implementation-x saves some properties only 
implementation-x is concerned with and implemention-y will have zero problems 
with.
The bottom line here is that somehow people seem to conclude that having 
non-defined information to store in the file is a fitting way to determine 
non-conformance. While completely ignoring the much harder to-check problem 
of verifying that implementations actually honoring the odf-specified 
properties.


> > In reality applications will be chosen based on which subset of the
> > features of ODF they support, both loading+displaying and saving them.
>
> If your app saves the extension data and it's re-opened in the same app,
> then nothing is lost. Only if it goes via a  couple of other ODF
> processors.  That's the price of standardization.

Thats what I was saying in my mail as well, and this is fine. The fact that 
extra-information is lost is not an issue for us and certainly not a reason 
to change the ODF specification.
-- 
Thomas Zander