marbux <> wrote on 03/01/2009 01:46:26 PM:
>
> Re: [office-comment] ODF still fails to specify scripting properly
> (ODF 1.2 CD01)
>
> On Sun, Mar 1, 2009 at 10:25 AM, <> wrote:
> > I'm making a distinction between perfecting the ODF 1.2 draft versus
an
> > expansion of scope. The issue is not that we define a scripting
interface
> > poorly. The issue is that we don't define one at all.
>
> Right. It's an interoperability breakpoint. But no expansion of scope
> is required to forbid embedded scripts in "strict" ODF 1.2.
> Interoperability trumps extensibility under JTC 1 Directives and the
> Agreement on Technical Barriers to Trade.
>
OK. If that is what you are getting at, then I agree. Even Microsoft
Office 2007 makes this distinction. Documents with scripts in them are
distinct from those without scripts. This is good security as well as
good for interoperability. Although the long-term solution may be to have
a well-defined runtime object model and script bindings, I have no
problems with having a conformance class that excludes scripts and macros.
And for the 0.01% of ODF users who know what an XML processing instruction
is, we could restrict these as well.
But I must say that this is my opinion only. This question has not been
discussed by the TC and opinions will probably be all over the board on
it.
-Rob
