-- replying below to -- From: jan i [mailto:[email protected]] Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 10:13 To: [email protected]; [email protected] Subject: Re: [CONF] Corinthia > ODF
[ ... ] Good work, both of you. A little question should we try to get hold of the newer standard, or does it not really matter ? <orcmid> ODF 1.0 was barely used before ODF 1.1 was introduced. ODF 1.1 was essentially a maintenance release, with the addition of some provisions to support accessibility. The current international standard and ODF 1.1 are at a common level, so one should always use ODF 1.1 and not ODF 1.0. ODF 1.0 documents are a subset anyhow. Since OpenOffice 3.x, the main support has been to some degree of ODF 1.2. To handle spreadsheets, ODF 1.2 is definitely the one to employ. There are a couple of breaking changes between 1.1 and 1.2 and otherwise, 1.1 works as a subset of 1.2 unless the 1.1 does not fit within the more-specific conformance requirements for 1.2. In addition to supporting ODF as such, there is the small matter of implementation-defined and implementation-dependent cases, including where an implementation does not interpret a feature or where it has a non-standard exception. I think that is where we enter the scope of Corinthia with regard to profiling its support for formats and also developing profiles of how other producers make conformant documents comes into play. Conformance information is available for the compliance with ODF in Microsoft Office, although it appears to be incomplete. For the OpenOffice.org family, I don't think the information has ever been made available in end-user or general-public understandable form with some sort of keying to the relevant standard(s). </orcmid> rgds jan I. [ ... ]
