Re: [office] Thoughts on ODF-Next

[Patrick Durusau <patrick@durusau.net>]

Michael,

On Mon, 2011-01-17 at 11:59 +0100, Michael Brauer wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> 
> Andreas J. Guelzow wrote:
> 
> > While I realize that we can't mandate that and in fact have no control
> > over whether a vendor calls their format ODF1.3 or whatever, I thin kwe
> 
> A CSD approval is the first level of approval in the OASIS TC process.
> So, if we approve an ODF 1.3 draft as CSD, and if an implementor 
> implements this CSD, why shouldn't that be called ODF 1.3? How would you 
> call it instead?
> 

I don't think successive CSDs would all be called ODF 1.3, without more.

See the Naming guidelines,
http://docs.oasis-open.org/specGuidelines/ndr/namingDirectives.html, in
part:


> The process of document revision as a technical activity takes place
> when an approved Work Product is edited and is assigned a new Working
> Draft revision number. Textually, a revision is a two-digit number
> associated with a Working Draft or a specific stage corresponding to a
> published instance. A revision number begins with "01" and is
> incremented by 1 for each release at each maturity level (stage).

Note that "Work Product" means anything voted upon by the committee.

Hope you are at the start of a great day!

Patrick
-- 
Patrick Durusau
patrick@durusau.net
Chair, V1 - US TAG to JTC 1/SC 34
Convener, JTC 1/SC 34/WG 3 (Topic Maps)
Editor, OpenDocument Format TC (OASIS), Project Editor ISO/IEC 26300
Co-Editor, ISO/IEC 13250-1, 13250-5 (Topic Maps)

Another Word For It (blog): http://tm.durusau.net
Homepage: http://www.durusau.net
Twitter: patrickDurusau
Newcomb Number: 1