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] Re: ODF future versions to JTC1

Jirka Kosek <jirka@kosek.cz> wrote on 01/07/2010 09:21:29 AM:

> I wouldn't be as sure as you. In past OASIS decided to push ODF 1.0 to
> ISO level. Once it was done one would expect that ODF TC will try to
> keep ISO and OASIS version synchronized and up-to-date. So instead of
> finding arguments why not to send ODF 1.1 to ISO and prolonging this
> situation by repeating same arguments and hypothetical timelines I would
> suggest sending ODF 1.1 to ISO as soon as possible.

However, an ODF 1.0 amendment does not preserve equivalence to OASIS ODF 
1.1, since it is an amendment, not a new revision.  Although it results in 
textually equivalent documents in OASIS and JTC1, they would not be of 
equal status.  For example, the European convention is to allow undated 
references to standards, or references to a standard with the 
qualification "or revised version".  I don't think that a PAS submission 
of ODF 1.1 leading to ISO/IEC 26300:2010 has the same status, in terms of 
existing citations, as an ISO/IEC 26300:2006/Amd.1.  I'm not sure that 
this kind of work around even meets JTC1's goal, which is "to avoid any 
divergence between the current JTC 1 revision of a transposed PAS and the 
current revision of the original specification published by the PAS 
submitter". (JTC1 Directives, 14.4.2). 


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