Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Which is definitive odf?

[marbux <marbux@gmail.com>]

On Mon, Jun 16, 2008 at 11:20 AM, Sam Johnston <samj@samj.net> wrote:
> I believe this is a different, but pertinent, point; whether or not we
> specify which ODF version(s) the TC will target. I am of mixed minds about
> this, though tending towards OpenDocument 1.2 which should be finalised
> around the time the TC is formed (see the Wikipedia OpenDocument article).

I think the timing of ODF 1.2 release went out the window when
Microsoft announced its decision to support ODF 1.1 and joined the ODF
TC to work on ODF 1.2. ODF 1.2 is grossly incompatible with Microsoft
Office, whose major apps' page layout engines are still running 16-bit
code buried under more than a decade of spaghetti code. The major
Office apps' code bases are very brittle. See e.g., my study of the
persistency of serious bugs in the Word footnote and endnote
features.<http://www.llrx.com/features/word.htm>.

Also, the barriers to OOo/MS Office interop using ODF as the
interchange medium have been thoroughly studied in the course of
developing conversion tools. It's going to take substantial
reprogramming of both Office and OOo as well as big changes in the ODF
1.2 spec for Microsoft to support ODF 1.2 in an interoperable way.

So I'd counsel against focusing on ODF 1.2 for this TC's work until
ODF 1.2 is stable and adopted. It's not a stable specification.

Best regards,

Paul E. Merrell, J.D. (Marbux)

-- 
Universal Interoperability Council
<http:www.universal-interop-council.org>