Hi Patrick,
On 02/02/09 15:46, Patrick Durusau wrote:
> Greetings!
>
> Granted that I fully support Michael's notion that the ODF TC should in
> the future be able to more routinely produce standard extensions to the
> format, but I also realize there maybe custom uses where there is no
> desire or need for an standardized extension. Or at least I would prefer
> to keep that open as a possibility and not to deny applications that
> substantially rely on ODF 1.2 from being able to claim that they conform
> to ODF 1.2 (as does their output, to the extent that it does).
I think it is important that users know whether an application that
claims to be ODF 1.2 compliant is able to store documents without
extensions, or only documents that contain such extensions. So, if we
would give up the requirement that all ODF producers are able to produce
strict conforming documents, we at least would need an additional
conformance class for producers, so that one can differ between a
producer that is able to create strictly conforming documents, and one
that isn't. This may be an option, but it doesn't make it easier to
understand what the various conformance levels actually mean.
What do you think?
Best regards
Michael
>
> Hope everyone is at the start of a great week!
>
> Patrick
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
--
Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
Sun Microsystems GmbH Nagelsweg 55
D-20097 Hamburg, Germany
http://sun.com/staroffice +49 40 23646 500
http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
Geschaeftsfuehrer: Thomas Schroeder, Wolfgang Engels, Dr. Roland Boemer
Vorsitzender des Aufsichtsrates: Martin Haering
