Re: Responding to comments received during public review of UBL 2.3 Candidate OASIS Standard

[David Goodenough <david.goodenough@broadwellmanor.co.uk>]

Thank you for responding to my comment.  I agree that your suggested resolution is in reality the only one open.

As an aside, you published this as an .xlsx document.  Surely as a body concerned with open standards you should be using Open Document Format (ODF) rather than the closed Microsoft Office formats.  Especially given that ODF comes from this TC's parent organisation Oasis.  I am not suggested that this is revisited for this release, or that it should in any way hold up the release of 2.3, but for 2.4 could you please move into the open document world?

On Wednesday, 12 May 2021 22:36:25 BST Kenneth Bengtsson wrote:

> Dear all

>

> The public review of UBL 2.3 has ended, and the TC received the following

> two comments: -

> https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl-comment/202103/msg00001.html -

> https://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/ubl/202103/msg00016.html

>

> The TC has reviewed the comments, and the resolutions are formally

> documented in this comment resolution log:

> https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/document.php?document_id=68563&wg_abb

> rev=ubl

>

> Thank you to everyone who took the time to review UBL 2.3! Your input is

> much appreciated.

>

> Best regards,

>

> Kenneth