Jim Seymour wrote
> Pedro wrote:
>> So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF
>> standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open
>> manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :)
> 
> OASIS establishes the standards, no?  If such is the case: What
> you've written, above, is what we call "putting the cart before the
> horse."  And that's putting the best possible light on it.

This is not how the ODF standard is developed. As Italo has indicated it
happens slowly over a long time, and there are various reasons for this.
There is a statement on the OASIS website (which unfortunately I cannot find
at present) which indicates that in order for a new feature to be included
in ODF-Next by OASIS, it must first be implemented in a few different pieces
of software e.g., Apache OO, LO, and AbiWord (2+ or 3+ implementations from
memory). ODF needs to be practical (based on real-world use cases) and
community-driven rather than a theoretical specification developed in
isolation by a chosen few.


TomD wrote
> LibreOffice does use the ODF 1.2 and that did become an ISO standard a
> couple of years ago.

No. The information provided by Italo up-thread is correct:


italovignoli wrote
> ... ODF 1.2 which is in the process of becoming an ISO standard (backward
> compatible with ODF 1.0). Standard definitions, by their own nature, are
> moving slowly.

Details on milestones in the ISO/IEC approval process  here
<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_standardization#OpenDocument_1.2> 
. 

Best wishes, Owen.



--
View this message in context: 
http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101650.html
Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

-- 
To unsubscribe 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

Reply via email to