[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.
On Wed, 2010-06-16 at 02:37 -0600, Bob Jolliffe wrote: > I am struggling to understand why so much energy is being spent on > this issue. The point of the effort is to produce an approved ODF 1.2 > standard. That is a matter of time but is the inevitable outcome. At > that point the authoritative version of that standard will indeed be > formatted using an approved standard (ie itself). > > Is the argument that all the committee drafts produced along the way > should not use the pre-approved format, but then we convert to ODF 1.2 > for the final publication? That seems silly and perhaps prone to > error. I fully support the current proposal to designate the odf 1.2 > version as the authoritative working document. To me it is a simple > expression of confidence in the end result. > I don't care in what format drafts are published. My problem is with having the _final_ version of a ODF1.2 to be written in ODF1.2. In that case the specification of the standard would depend on that specification itself. As mathematician I can well imagine a text that has more than one self-consistent interpretations, ie. a different implementation could implement that standard differently but in such a way that its presentation of the standard again fits what it is doing. Andreas