Re: [office] Revised ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review Ballot Motion

["Andreas J. Guelzow" <andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca>]

On Mon, 2010-06-07 at 03:37 -0600, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02
- Hamburg wrote:
> Hi Thorsten,
> 
> On 06/04/10 23:14, Thorsten Behrens wrote:
> > I asked:
> >>> Shall further from the three versions of the specification document
> >>> (ODF, PDF and HTML) that will be produced after approval as committee
> >>> draft the ODF version be the authoritative one?
> >> I think a clarification is missing here - which ODF version will we
> >> use to publish this authoritative document in?
> >>
> > Hi Michael,
> > 
> > so looking into OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05.zip it seems the answer is
> > "1.2" - isn't that a bit self-referential? 
> 
> It is comment practice. If you look at the various HTML specification, 
> then the HTML 3.2 specification is an HTML 3.2 document, the HTML 4.01 
> specification is an HTML 4 document, and so on.
> 
No. The primary html 4.01 standard is a text file. (At least that's
listed first by w3c.)


Andreas