OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

oiic-formation-discuss message

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

Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Question on references

Shawn <sgrover@open2space.com> wrote on 06/10/2008 01:49:22 PM:

> Rob, in an earlier thread you made some references to ODF 1.0 with
> regards to conformity and/or interoperability.  I'm just curious why
> version 1.0 would be referenced, and not 1.1 or 1.2.  Both 1.0 and 1.1
> are available via the Oasis site
> (
http://www.oasis-open.org/specs/index.php), but I don't see 1.2 there
> (yet) - is it not approved yet?.  So it would seem to me that working
> with 1.1 at least makes the most sense.  Or are we looking at IIC for
> ALL versions of ODF?  This can help address the scope issue we need to
> define.

I think this was just because I had the ODF 1.0 text in front of me.  I've been working on ODF 1.0 draft errata recently.

I don't think we want to restrict ourselves in the proposed TC charter to any specific version of ODF.  I think the TC can decide itself, based on its participating members, which is the most relevant version to tackle initially.  My guess is it would be ODF 1.1 or ODF 1.2 (now in draft).  Most (but not all) vendors are targeting ODF 1.1 today.

In any case, the progression from ODF 1.0 to ODF 1.1 to ODF 1.2 is mainly one of functional augmentation.  So there is going to be a huge amount of overlap.  I'd hope that test cases (and test requirements before that) would be annotated with what versions of the standard it applies to.  We want to maximize reuse.


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