[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] Motion for approving ODF 1.2 as Committee Draft andsubmitting it for pubic review.
robert_weir@us.ibm.com wrote: > In the end our choices are limited to: > > 1) Choose the ODF document as the authoritative document. This has the > advantage, when viewed in the same editor, of being closest to what the > editors actually wrote and saw. It has the disadvantage of not being an > approved standard. > Hi Rob, all, there are several subitems of 1) available, the most obvious one being to switch OOo to 1.0/1.1 compat mode & perform a SaveAs. That would make the authoritative odf content adhere to a published standard. I ran a graphical comparison script on the output & found exactly four minor differences, all due to numbering changes, but those surely can be fixed manually. > So I don't see any perfect choice here. Any OASIS TC needs to make a > decision on this consideration, and whether you pick the editable source > or a derived/generated version, there are opportunities for surprises. > Sure. But there are wise & not so wise choices, and I believe publishing a standard in precisely the language it should define is among the latter. ;) Regards, -- Thorsten
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]