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] Revised ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review Ballot Motion

I agree that the URL for the HTML version of the HTML 4.01 specification is
listed first, with the alternative formats, including text, on the next

I also confirm that the latest version in HTML has this in its first line:
<!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">

It is also the case that the HTML 4.01 W3C Proposed Recommendation of
1999-08-24 is now in HTML 4.01 Transitional. And the HTML 4.0 W3C
Recommendations are still published with HTML 4.0 Transitional DOCTYPE

On the other hand, the last Working Document for HTML 4.0 is put up in HTML
with no DOCTYPE declaration of any kind at

I think the question isn't so much about a standard being published in the
format it describes, although it would be nice to make sure it is backward
compatible.  I think the question is about ODF 1.2 drafts for public review
being published in a format that has no approved standard (yet).  Since
there are also HTML and PDF versions made available, I don't think there is
much of a problem unless a reviewer stumbles on a discrepancy between one of
those and the authoritative ODF flavor.

I also don't think it means much to appeal to W3C as a precedent for OASIS
TC Standards Development.

On the other hand, I don't expect the reliance on OpenOffice 3.2.x to change
in how we publish ODF versions of these CDs and the subsequent CS and OS
authoritative flavors.  (I'm not so clear on the transposition to a
published IS through JTC1 though.)

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM [mailto:Michael.Brauer@Sun.COM] 
Sent: Monday, June 07, 2010 07:43
To: Andreas J. Guelzow
Cc: Thorsten Behrens; OpenDocument Mailing List
Subject: Re: [office] Revised ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review Ballot Motion

On 06/07/10 15:30, Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
[ ... ]
> No. The primary html 4.01 standard is a text file. (At least that's
> listed first by w3c.)

Is it? If I look at


then the link for HTML 4.01 references the HTML 4.01 specification in 
HTML 4.01 format.

The link for XHTML 1.1 references the XHTML 1.1 specification in XHTML 
1.1 format. There is even no text file.


[ ... ] 

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