[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: RE: [office] Revised ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review Ballot Motion
Mmz, would there be a noticeable difference between saving it as ODF 1.1 vs 1.2 ? (Outline umbering issue perhaps ?) Bart ________________________________________ From: Andreas J. Guelzow [andreas.guelzow@concordia.ab.ca] Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 3:30 PM To: Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg Cc: Thorsten Behrens; OpenDocument Mailing List Subject: Re: [office] Revised ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review Ballot Motion 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 --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that generates this mail. Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at: https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]