RE: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in Authoritative Version of UOML-1-v1.0

["Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamilton@acm.org>]

I overlooked something.  I noticed the duplicated lines in the PDF table of contents, reported here:
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uoml-x-comment/200809/msg00001.html

I failed to notice that the duplicates are also in the .odt table of contents when the document is opened in OpenOffice.org 2.4.1.  

As far as I can tell, the authoritative version, 
http://docs.oasis-open.org/uoml-x/v1.0/cs01/uoml-part1-v1.0-cs01.odt
has the defect along with the version problem that I already reported.

 - Dennis 

PS: I cannot determine when the duplication arose.  Is it also in the approved Committee Specification that was created within the TC?

-----Original Message-----
From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:dennis.hamilton@acm.org] 
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/uoml-x-comment/200809/msg00000.html
Sent: Thursday, September 04, 2008 15:24
To: UOML-X Comment
Cc: 'Mary McRae'
Subject: [uoml-x-comment] Defects in Authoritative Version of UOML-1-v1.0

I am sad to report that the Editable Source (Authoritative) version of the Committee Specification is in a format that is identified as ODF 1.2, a specification that has not even reached committee draft at this point.  The file has been created by a specific product (OpenOffice.org 3.0 beta) that is in beta test.  

The current supported version of OpenOffice.org is 2.4.1, and this version is reported as up-to-date.  The OpenOffice.org site page for 3.0 beta (http://download.openoffice.org/3.0beta/) has this message:

      "The software is not recommended for production use at this stage. 
       There are no guarantees. For production, use our most recent stable
       version."

I believe that this is inappropriate as a published, authoritative edition.  

[ ... ]