[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 line. 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 declarations. 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 <http://www.w3.org/TR/WD-html40-970708/cover.html>. 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 http://www.w3.org/standards/techs/html 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. Michael [ ... ]
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]