Replying to both Gabriela and Jan comments farther below,
1. The TL;DR: Even though there are people still using StarOffice on a Sun
Workstation, I don't think these are a significant component of likely
Corinthia users. Our use of an intermediary is not likely to get us to
universal interconvertibility.
2. It is necessary to support input of all versions that are known especially
because if a document says it is in ODF 1.2, that does not mean it uses any
features that are not in ODF 1.1, and if it is one of the breaking cases, that
can be handled if there is enough information about the intended level of ODF.
(But an ODF 1.2 implementation might still be implementing an ODF 1.1
interpretation.).
For output, if it is not possible to indicate the actual level of features
employed, it is usually necessary to identify outputs as ODF 1.2.
3. IMPORTANT EXCEPTION: If the DocFilter implementations for ODF input and ODF
updating do not preserve any features used above a given ODF level, that level
should be indicated as the output level. (I.e., if ODF 1.2-unique features are
not even supported, don't call the output ODF 1.2, no matter what the input is
claimed to be.)
This might well be a significant part of spiral development and progressive
integration of an ODF-support roadmap.
- Dennis
-----Original Message-----
From: Gabriela Gibson [mailto:[email protected]]
Sent: Wednesday, March 11, 2015 16:43
To: [email protected]
Cc: [email protected]
Subject: Re: [CONF] Corinthia > ODF
On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:02 PM, jan i <[email protected]> wrote:
[ ... ]
> In my opinion, we must be able to read all versions, but only write the
> newest.
>
> This is a bit devil's advocate tale, but, it's a true story:
[ ... ]
So, there will be occasions where people will want to be able to use a
legacy program, because it makes life easier for them, or perhaps, an old
machine is all they can afford, or they simply don't want to enter upgrade
hell. When ODF 6.0 comes round (and it probably will, eventually) there
will be lots of people wanting/needing this kind of functionality.
Also, Hackernews had an interesting discussion today:
https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=9185356 --- maybe not quite
applicable to our situation here, but pretty similar.
I think it's worthwhile to consider to make it bidirectional by basic
design.
G
