Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] My perspective. Extensions

["Dave Pawson" <dave.pawson@gmail.com>]

2008/6/30 David Gerard <dgerard@gmail.com>:
> 2008/6/30 Ben Baston <bbaston@gmail.com>:
>> On Mon, Jun 30, 2008 at 5:08 PM, Craig A. Eddy <tyche@cox.net> wrote:
>
>>> +1 in general, though I agree that your proposal might need some
>>> re-wording ... found one sentence to be worded in a slightly confused way.
>> Certainly agree - edited myself into a corner, I did! Apologies to all and
>> perhaps this is less confusing. Or not. Again, as an interoperability
>> concept fundamental to the OICC TC, some variation of the below is humbly
>> suggested:


+1 to the idea.

Constraining it to the purpose of this group:
Proposed amendment.

That any extension to ODF (appropriate version) be recognised by
compliance testing and
the tester informed.

To get that from the TC, our deliverable should be:

"Deliverable:
   A means of identifying extensions to ODF and adding an warning
comment to the test output"

Any wordsmithing on that to clarify?


That is in scope.


regards

-- 
Dave Pawson
XSLT XSL-FO FAQ.
http://www.dpawson.co.uk