Subject: RE: [opendocument-users] simple OO.org document goes awry in MS Office 2007w/SP2 - what went wrong?
My opinion: I never expect an end user to understand the ODF standard any more than I'd expect an FM radio listener to understand the exact parameters of frequency modulation. On the other hand, I'd expect vendors of radio broadcast equipment and receivers to have intimate knowledge of the relevant standards. Similarly, the technical details of file formats should be invisible to the end user. So any time the document does not interoperable, the end user cannot tell whether it is a bug in the authoring application, or a bug in the destination application, and whether any of these bugs are related to the standard. The best thing to do is report it to the the vendors involved in the transaction, let them debug the issue. If it ends up to be an issue in the ODF standard, then they should be able to propose any changes necessary. In this particular cases, both vendors participate on the ODF TC, so they have direct access to make such technical proposals. -Rob "Cody, John (OFT)" <John.Cody@cio.ny.gov> wrote on 06/15/2009 10:45:54 PM: > Paul: > > "Did you set OOWriter to save as ODF 1.1?" > > Yes, I did that when I started the document, hoping for good > interoperability. > > "I'd suggest reporting the experience to the ODF TC along with a > request that they indentify [sic] the relevant portions of the ODF > 1.1 and IS 26300 specifications that are ambiguous..." > > Whoa! Huge conclusory leap, there. Who said anything is > ambiguous in the spec? Maybe there are other reasons for the > failure here. > > "I encourage you to make a regular practice of reporting such > interoperability failures to the ODF TC..." > > Is there an ODF TC for Interoperability Failures? The last > thing I want to do is bother the TC with comments not related to > their activities, and not demonstrably an ODF problem. > > "... using OOo as a de facto reference implementation is problematic > because it is a moving target not under the control of the ODF TC." > > I don't see the problem. It's open source, so in a sense it > is under their and everybody's control. And reference > implementations are typically not under standards bodies' > control, are they? > > Thanks for the thoughts, Paul, but only the version 1.1. comment is > on point. JC > > > =============================================== > John C. Cody, Associate Counsel > Office of the NYS Chief Information Officer/NYS Office for Technology > http://www.cio.ny.gov > [The statements expressed herein are my own and do not necessarily > reflect the policies, practices or opinions of my employer or anyone > else. Nothing herein constitutes legal advice - if you need legal > advice, please consult your own attorney.] > > > -----Original Message----- > From: marbux [mailto:email@example.com] > Sent: Monday, June 15, 2009 4:13 PM > To: Cody, John (OFT) > Cc: firstname.lastname@example.org > Subject: Re: [opendocument-users] simple OO.org document goes awry > in MS Office 2007 w/SP2 - what went wrong? > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2009 at 12:40 PM, Cody, John (OFT) > <John.Cody@cio.ny.gov> wrote: > > > > > What went wrong? Is there anything I should be doing in > particular when I draft documents in OO.org 3.1 that will help the > document be interpreted better by MS Office 2007 SP2? > > Hi, John, > > Did you set OOWriter to save as ODF 1.1? By default, OOo 3.x writes > to what is called ODF 1.2, although there is no ODF 1.2 yet. The > setting is at Tools > Options > Load/Save > General. Note, however, > the warning on that dialog page that not using ODF 1.2 may cause > data loss when saving. > > If you experienced that after setting the save format to ODF 1.1, > I'd suggest reporting the experience to the ODF TC along with a > request that they indentify the relevant portions of the ODF 1.1 and > IS 26300 specifications that are ambiguous and to repair those > defects in the specs. If you experienced that with the save format > set to ODF 1.2, you might report it as pointing to a potential > incompatibility between the ODF 1.1 and 1.2 specs > > The proper list for such reports is the office-comment list, > <email@example.com>>. Subscription instructions are here. < > http://www.oasis-open.org/maillists/guidelines.php#subscribing>. > > I encourage you to make a regular practice of reporting such > interoperability failures to the ODF TC along with similar requests. > ODF has no reference implementation and using OOo as a de facto > reference implementation is problematic because it is a moving > target not under the control of the ODF TC. So interop bug reports > should go to the ODF TC so that the ambiguities in the specification > can be repaired, unless you are certain that the interop failure > results from non-conformance to the specification(s). > > Best regards, > > Paul E. Merrell, J.D. . > > -- > Universal Interoperability Council > <http:www.universal-interop-council.org> > > > This e-mail, including any attachments, may be confidential, > privileged or otherwise legally protected. It is intended only for > the addressee. If you received this e-mail in error or from someone > who was not authorized to send it to you, do not disseminate, copy > or otherwise use this e-mail or its attachments. Please notify the > sender immediately by reply e-mail and delete the e-mail from your system.