Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Proposed Use case -- Interoperability in vertical and horizontal ODF markets

["Peter Dolding" <oiaohm@gmail.com>]

Drop the  Woffle marbux its unrequired. 

Totally unneeded.
From  robert_weir@us.ibm.com  for charter "To improve interoperability among ODF implementations".

You cannot have interoperability when people are doing non documented things.  So its meaning is 100 percent clear.  If a app is doing undocumented things suffer.

"OOo 2.x is non-conformant because it eats all foreign elements and attributes other than its own and paragraphs and text

spans."  It might be.   Now applications are equally non-conformant if they need them to render document.  So who is wrong.  Both are marbux.  Its not a life saver.  Reason OpenOffice eating them is forcing conformance and interoperability because undocumented stuff is getting deleted.  So its not 100 percent in the wrong.   The applications stuff up because there non standard setting have been deleted don't have a leg to stand on.  You cannot make a case that doing these non documented things are good for the interperability of ODF.  So suffer and fix it.  Other applications would be perfectly in there rights to do the same to OpenOffice.

If the ODF supporting applications want to have a deleting war over non documented bits so be it.   TC goal is interoperability and a war like that will help it.

Now since we are the ODF TC.   Documents we should use at prime is the ODF spec.   Making sure applications are following the spec to the max of there ablity does improve interoperabilty.

TC are perfectly allows to use Draft specs for guidence if current specs has disputes.   Even write test using the Draft specs before the specs are finally approved as long as the test clearly tell people of that.

So stop attacking and get your house in order marbux.

Peter Dolding