Below, Jan asks
“Does a consumer normally have some sort of conformance sheet
(like we have for communication protocols) or is it solely the user
that painfully finds the lack of support ?”
I think this is easy to answer. Where have you found an ODF conformance sheet
for Apache OpenOffice? LibreOffice?
Many choices of what to implement and also deviations of the way features are
implemented are left implementation-dependent. In ODF 1.2 there are more cases
where *implementation-defined* is a requirement. I am not aware how any of
those have come up for AOO and LibO and how the implementation-based choices
are defined, if any.
Here is a serious conformance statement I have found:
<http://technet.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ff852100(v=office.14).aspx>
Here are some about ODF (scroll down to [MS-OODF], [MS-OODF2], and [MS-OODF3],
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/gg548604.aspx>.
Here’s the on-line version of the one for ODF 1.2 support:
<http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/hh695327.aspx>.
It is instructive to expand the sidebar section 2 Standards Support Statements
and 2.1 Normative Variations. (I never know what it means to say something is
not supported. I believe it is clear that such features are not produced, but
I have no idea what happens when a not-supported provision is encountered in an
input document. All in all, I think this is, compared to other
implementations, a “glass-half-full” condition.)
In the past there was an on-line database that you could use to review
compliance with ODF feature by feature, line chapter and verse. It provided
for user comments and questions at that level. It was ill-maintained and I can
no longer find it. It looks like the [MS-OODFn] documents have taken on that
task. The statements in those documents are very much what was to be found on
the database.
Cynics will point out that the EUC required Microsoft to describe all
deviations in its support of ODF. It is unfortunate that the EUC did not
consider that such statements would be important from other sources of ODF
Consumers as well.
-- Dennis E. Hamilton
dennis.hamil...@acm.org +1-206-779-9430
https://keybase.io/orcmid PGP F96E 89FF D456 628A
X.509 certs used and requested for signed e-mail
-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:j...@apache.org]
Sent: Sunday, August 3, 2014 00:57
To: dev; Dennis Hamilton
Subject: Re: OOXML
On 2 August 2014 22:31, Dennis E. Hamilton <dennis.hamil...@acm.org> wrote:
> [ ... ] There is no strict minimum Conforming OpenDocument
> Consumer. A consumer must not object to anything in the document file that
> conforms to the ODF specification, but it is not required to "interpret"
> all or even any minimum set of features. There is no producer that I am
> aware of that produces all features provided for in the ODF specification,
> and most implementations only interpret those features that they are
> designed to produce (sometimes incorrectly) themselves. This doesn't
> matter too much if you use implementations with a common genealogy, but
> across independent implementations not having any common code base there
> tend to be unexpected surprises. There are also many places where a
> provision of ODF is not rigorously defined and implementation-dependent
> variation is the result, whether explicitly called out (e.g., for macros
> and scripts) or not (e.g., for supported image formats).
>
Does a consumer normally have some sort of conformance sheet (like we have
for communication protocols) or is it solely the user that painfully finds
the lack of support ?
[ ... ]
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
