[Thanks Cor, I caught this one on time. New thread - this is not about the original users problem at all.]
I have no idea what it means to be using 1.2 extended (other than it being the recommended default). There is no way to identify an ODF document as "1.2 extended". There's also no way to tell as an user whether a document written with that option set *actually* depends on a LibreOffice extension or not. Using 1.1 as my output format, or using 1.2 as my output format (not extended), I have never received a warning that my document uses features that are not supported by the target format. I don't know if that is because I have not done anything to require an extension or because I am not being told. And finally, I have no way of telling what another consumer will do if an actual extension feature is encountered in a document identified as being ODF 1.2. (Well, I know what ODF 1.2 suggests be done. I will sort-of know what MSFT products will actually do, assuming that implementation notes come along for any support of ODF 1.2 from Redmond. I also don't know what the ODF 1.1 support will do to ODF 1.2 features not in ODF 1.1 or extensions beyond 1.2. I wonder if it is possible to know that much from current MSFT ODF 1.1 implementation notes. I must go look.) In short, I have no idea how to answer this question. I am on the OASIS Technical Committee for ODF Interoperability and Conformance (the OIC TC). I hope that efforts there can help take some of the unknowns out of what I just said. That is not the current state of affairs. - Dennis PS: Concerning your second question, Microsoft has participants on the ODF TC who've contributed considerable effort in polishing the OpenFormula specification, along with folks affiliated with OpenOffice.org, LibreOffice, Lotus Symphony, Gnumeric (very big thank you to Andreas Guelzow) and others. There were also great contributors on the comment lists. There is a ballot underway *this*very*week* to advance the ODF 1.2 Committee Specification 01 to ODF 1.2 Candidate OASIS Standard and subsequent approval by the OASIS membership. That would be the last step. There are no secrets in this process. Here is the current status of the electronic ballot now in progress: <http://www.oasis-open.org/committees/ballot.php?id=2101>. See for yourself. It hasn't passed yet, but I have no doubt that it will, and without any "No" votes. (I am on leave-of-absence, so you don't see my name there. I am an eligible Voting Member.) Participants from Microsoft have not voted against advancement of this specification toward becoming a standard even once. Not once. Not ever on the ODF TC. To my limited knowledge, participants representing National Bodies at the ISO and also associated with Microsoft have never voted against approval of ODF or any updates to ODF that have been made so far at ISO. That's not where No votes seem to come from in that particular document-standards cat-fight and fud-match. -----Original Message----- From: e-letter [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Thursday, September 08, 2011 02:17 To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] Calc corrupted an Excel xlsx file, should I report a bug? On 07/09/2011, Dennis E. Hamilton <[email protected]> wrote: ... > > Now that ODF 1.2 does have an agreed specification for formulas and requires > that to be used in fully-conforming ODF 1.2 Spreadsheet documents, we will > see how implementations line up as there are releases from everyone that > support OpenFormula. I believe that LibreOffice is already using > OpenFormula in current releases. Microsoft's support for ODF 1.2 is not > known at this time, although there is a meeting in Brussels in April where > Microsoft is expected to provide more information. > The default specification for LO is 12extended that I am now using. So supposing m$ suddenly provides support for ods12, does that mean I would have to change the LO specification down from 12extended to 12 so that formulas are preserved for other ods12 programs? > > Eike Rathke, here, was one of the major contributors to the definition of > OpenFormula, now in ODF 1.2, that will also be in an international standard > once ODF 1.2 is accepted by ISO. > It would be appreciated to receive notification when this specification is accepted. Is m$ surreptitiously trying to prevent/delay iso acceptance, or now bribing (sorry, wrong word, "suggesting") iso to adopt some m$ooxmlooformula alternative? -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
