New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
12 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Peter Kovacs-3
Hello all,


Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF menaged to raise money and
do the work for ODF v 1.3.

https://www.oasis-open.org/news/announcements/open-document-format-for-office-applications-opendocument-v1-3-from-the-opendocum

I have created Bug https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=128282


All the Best

Peter



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Pedro Lino-3
Hi Peter, all

> Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF managed to raise money and
> do the work for ODF v 1.3.

I believe this is a quite relevant announcement!

If ODF 1.3 is only used by a single Office suite then it will no longer be "software independent" which IMHO defeats the purpose of an Open Document format...
On the other hand given that ODF 1.3 is currently not an ISO standard, Microsoft will not care about it until it is (in fact they are making sure that ODF is not used at all)

This will also isolate AOO since Open Documents will only travel in one direction without feature loss (much like what happens now with Microsoft's XML formats)

Maybe it is in OASIS' interest (and even TDF's?) that other software adopts ODF 1.3 and that they could/should provide some support/developer time?

Regards,
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Jörg Schmidt-2
Hello,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 11:51 AM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out
>
> Hi Peter, all
>
> > Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF managed to
> raise money and
> > do the work for ODF v 1.3.
>
> I believe this is a quite relevant announcement!
>
> If ODF 1.3 is only used by a single Office suite then it will
> no longer be "software independent" which IMHO defeats the
> purpose of an Open Document format...
> On the other hand given that ODF 1.3 is currently not an ISO
> standard, Microsoft will not care about it until it is (in
> fact they are making sure that ODF is not used at all)
>
> This will also isolate AOO since Open Documents will only
> travel in one direction without feature loss (much like what
> happens now with Microsoft's XML formats)

You described it very well.

I myself have been following the development of ODF from the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the TDF, because:

In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate from this and implement OASIS standard.

We all know what to think about MS in general ... but ... the approach of MS to ODF to implement the ISO standard is an understandable and reasonable decision.

I make this assessment for the following reason:
if it wasn't important that ODF was defined as an ISO standard, you could have stuck with the OASIS standard from the beginning.


> Maybe it is in OASIS' interest (and even TDF's?) that other
> software adopts ODF 1.3 and that they could/should provide
> some support/developer time?

Probably this is a pragmatically correct question and we have no real possibility to behave better.

However, we should keep in mind that the behaviour of the TDF is not optimal as far as the interests of the sum of all users are concerned.
It is likely that MS is playing a similar game with OOXML, but the FOSS community should not see this as an example or excuse for their own actions.



greetings,
Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Regina Henschel
Hi Jörg,

Jörg Schmidt schrieb am 09-Feb-20 um 12:28:
> Hello,
[..]

>
> I myself have been following the development of ODF from the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the TDF, because:
>
> In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate from this and implement OASIS standard.

No, it is the only way to go. ISO itself does not develop standards by
itself. The standards are developed somewhere else and then they are
submitted to ISO. Only after ODF 1.3 is an approved OASIS standard, we
can go the next step to ISO.

> However, we should keep in mind that the behaviour of the TDF is not optimal as far as the interests of the sum of all users are concerned.

Without the help of TDF we would not have got the COSM project and ODF
1.3 would be far away from becoming a standard.
https://publicsoftware.eu/members/cosm-project/

Kind regards
Regina

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by Jörg Schmidt-2
My personal opinion in this matter is that it does not matter what
others do. All that counts is that ODF 1.3 is out.

If others want to join the party everyone is welcome. If they do not
want to that is fine, too.

I am personal very happy that the TDF has managed to organize this. And
I am excited to work on this.


So I would like to focus on the Todos what we need to do in order to get
this done.

My fist Ideas would be:

# compare 1.3with 1.2 or see if we get any other compares of changes.

# Then we need to check what is covered by the 1.2 extended implementation.

# 3 We need to make a plan what is to implement for 1.3 and make a
tracking list of features and tests to implement.


Any more Ideas?


All the Best

Peter


On 09.02.20 12:28, Jörg Schmidt wrote:

> Hello,
>
>> -----Original Message-----
>> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
>> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 11:51 AM
>> To: [hidden email]
>> Subject: Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out
>>
>> Hi Peter, all
>>
>>> Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF managed to
>> raise money and
>>> do the work for ODF v 1.3.
>> I believe this is a quite relevant announcement!
>>
>> If ODF 1.3 is only used by a single Office suite then it will
>> no longer be "software independent" which IMHO defeats the
>> purpose of an Open Document format...
>> On the other hand given that ODF 1.3 is currently not an ISO
>> standard, Microsoft will not care about it until it is (in
>> fact they are making sure that ODF is not used at all)
>>
>> This will also isolate AOO since Open Documents will only
>> travel in one direction without feature loss (much like what
>> happens now with Microsoft's XML formats)
> You described it very well.
>
> I myself have been following the development of ODF from the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the TDF, because:
>
> In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate from this and implement OASIS standard.
>
> We all know what to think about MS in general ... but ... the approach of MS to ODF to implement the ISO standard is an understandable and reasonable decision.
>
> I make this assessment for the following reason:
> if it wasn't important that ODF was defined as an ISO standard, you could have stuck with the OASIS standard from the beginning.
>
>
>> Maybe it is in OASIS' interest (and even TDF's?) that other
>> software adopts ODF 1.3 and that they could/should provide
>> some support/developer time?
> Probably this is a pragmatically correct question and we have no real possibility to behave better.
>
> However, we should keep in mind that the behaviour of the TDF is not optimal as far as the interests of the sum of all users are concerned.
> It is likely that MS is playing a similar game with OOXML, but the FOSS community should not see this as an example or excuse for their own actions.
>
>
>
> greetings,
> Jörg
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Peter Kovacs-3
Small correction:

I am greatfull to all involved for ODF 1.3. I do not want to exclude
anyone. I think this is really Awesome!

And I whish someday, AOO will have also people somehow helping to
develop ODF format further.

I am sure there is still lot of work to do.


All the Best

Peter

On 09.02.20 17:22, Peter Kovacs wrote:

> My personal opinion in this matter is that it does not matter what
> others do. All that counts is that ODF 1.3 is out.
>
> If others want to join the party everyone is welcome. If they do not
> want to that is fine, too.
>
> I am personal very happy that the TDF has managed to organize this. And
> I am excited to work on this.
>
>
> So I would like to focus on the Todos what we need to do in order to get
> this done.
>
> My fist Ideas would be:
>
> # compare 1.3with 1.2 or see if we get any other compares of changes.
>
> # Then we need to check what is covered by the 1.2 extended implementation.
>
> # 3 We need to make a plan what is to implement for 1.3 and make a
> tracking list of features and tests to implement.
>
>
> Any more Ideas?
>
>
> All the Best
>
> Peter
>
>
> On 09.02.20 12:28, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>>> -----Original Message-----
>>> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
>>> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 11:51 AM
>>> To: [hidden email]
>>> Subject: Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out
>>>
>>> Hi Peter, all
>>>
>>>> Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF managed to
>>> raise money and
>>>> do the work for ODF v 1.3.
>>> I believe this is a quite relevant announcement!
>>>
>>> If ODF 1.3 is only used by a single Office suite then it will
>>> no longer be "software independent" which IMHO defeats the
>>> purpose of an Open Document format...
>>> On the other hand given that ODF 1.3 is currently not an ISO
>>> standard, Microsoft will not care about it until it is (in
>>> fact they are making sure that ODF is not used at all)
>>>
>>> This will also isolate AOO since Open Documents will only
>>> travel in one direction without feature loss (much like what
>>> happens now with Microsoft's XML formats)
>> You described it very well.
>>
>> I myself have been following the development of ODF from the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the TDF, because:
>>
>> In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate from this and implement OASIS standard.
>>
>> We all know what to think about MS in general ... but ... the approach of MS to ODF to implement the ISO standard is an understandable and reasonable decision.
>>
>> I make this assessment for the following reason:
>> if it wasn't important that ODF was defined as an ISO standard, you could have stuck with the OASIS standard from the beginning.
>>
>>
>>> Maybe it is in OASIS' interest (and even TDF's?) that other
>>> software adopts ODF 1.3 and that they could/should provide
>>> some support/developer time?
>> Probably this is a pragmatically correct question and we have no real possibility to behave better.
>>
>> However, we should keep in mind that the behaviour of the TDF is not optimal as far as the interests of the sum of all users are concerned.
>> It is likely that MS is playing a similar game with OOXML, but the FOSS community should not see this as an example or excuse for their own actions.
>>
>>
>>
>> greetings,
>> Jörg
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Rory O'Farrell
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 17:22:12 +0100
Peter Kovacs <[hidden email]> wrote:

> My personal opinion in this matter is that it does not matter what
> others do. All that counts is that ODF 1.3 is out.
>
> If others want to join the party everyone is welcome. If they do not
> want to that is fine, too.
>
> I am personal very happy that the TDF has managed to organize this. And
> I am excited to work on this.
>
>
> So I would like to focus on the Todos what we need to do in order to get
> this done.
>
> My fist Ideas would be:
>
> # compare 1.3with 1.2 or see if we get any other compares of changes.
>
> # Then we need to check what is covered by the 1.2 extended implementation.
>
> # 3 We need to make a plan what is to implement for 1.3 and make a
> tracking list of features and tests to implement.
>
>
> Any more Ideas?
>
>
> All the Best
>
> Peter

Is there a document from Oasis giving a synopsis of the changes from 1.2 to 1.3?  This would give an  idea of how much work was involved in the transition from 1.2.

Rory


>
> On 09.02.20 12:28, Jörg Schmidt wrote:
> > Hello,
> >
> >> -----Original Message-----
> >> From: Pedro Lino [mailto:[hidden email]]
> >> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 11:51 AM
> >> To: [hidden email]
> >> Subject: Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out
> >>
> >> Hi Peter, all
> >>
> >>> Just a heads up. On FOSDEM I learned that TDF managed to
> >> raise money and
> >>> do the work for ODF v 1.3.
> >> I believe this is a quite relevant announcement!
> >>
> >> If ODF 1.3 is only used by a single Office suite then it will
> >> no longer be "software independent" which IMHO defeats the
> >> purpose of an Open Document format...
> >> On the other hand given that ODF 1.3 is currently not an ISO
> >> standard, Microsoft will not care about it until it is (in
> >> fact they are making sure that ODF is not used at all)
> >>
> >> This will also isolate AOO since Open Documents will only
> >> travel in one direction without feature loss (much like what
> >> happens now with Microsoft's XML formats)
> > You described it very well.
> >
> > I myself have been following the development of ODF from the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the TDF, because:
> >
> > In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate from this and implement OASIS standard.
> >
> > We all know what to think about MS in general ... but ... the approach of MS to ODF to implement the ISO standard is an understandable and reasonable decision.
> >
> > I make this assessment for the following reason:
> > if it wasn't important that ODF was defined as an ISO standard, you could have stuck with the OASIS standard from the beginning.
> >
> >
> >> Maybe it is in OASIS' interest (and even TDF's?) that other
> >> software adopts ODF 1.3 and that they could/should provide
> >> some support/developer time?
> > Probably this is a pragmatically correct question and we have no real possibility to behave better.
> >
> > However, we should keep in mind that the behaviour of the TDF is not optimal as far as the interests of the sum of all users are concerned.
> > It is likely that MS is playing a similar game with OOXML, but the FOSS community should not see this as an example or excuse for their own actions.
> >
> >
> >
> > greetings,
> > Jörg
> >
> >
> > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> > For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
> >
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


--
Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

RE: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Jörg Schmidt-2
In reply to this post by Regina Henschel
Hello Regina,

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Regina Henschel [mailto:[hidden email]]
> Sent: Sunday, February 09, 2020 5:07 PM
> To: [hidden email]
> Subject: Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out
>
> Hi Jörg,
>
> Jörg Schmidt schrieb am 09-Feb-20 um 12:28:
> > Hello,
> [..]
>
> >
> > I myself have been following the development of ODF from
> the very beginning and I have to underline what you write, or
> rather I have to take a critical look at the approach of the
> TDF, because:
> >
> > In terms of a free, uniform format for office documents and
> the declared intention to formulate this standard as an ISO
> standard, it is regularly counterproductive for LO to deviate
> from this and implement OASIS standard.

so what? What is the problem _with going exactly the way you mentioned here_, but only updating the filters in the software when the ISO standard is published?

> Without the help of TDF we would not have got the COSM
> project and ODF
> 1.3 would be far away from becoming a standard.
> https://publicsoftware.eu/members/cosm-project/

ODF existed long before the TDF.

Publication ODF 1.0:
1 May 2005 (OASIS), 3 May 2006 (ISO)

Foundation of TDF:
28 September 2010 (announced), 17 February 2012 (officially established)


By the way, I have no intention whatsoever of belittling the TFD's services to ODF, I am only criticising its actions in some details.


greetings,
Jörg


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Yury
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
Peter Kovacs-3 wrote
> So I would like to focus on the Todos what we need to do in order to get
> this done.
> ...
> Any more Ideas?

There ought to be some checking of how unified is the handling of the 1.2
plain or extended between the LO and AOO.
I remember seeing some differences already.
Is there a testsuite for the file formats?




--
Sent from: http://openoffice.2283327.n4.nabble.com/Development-f2916443.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Pedro Lino-3
Hi Yuri, all

> There ought to be some checking of how unified is the handling of the 1.2
> plain or extended between the LO and AOO.

If I understand correctly only ODF 1.2 is a standard (OASIS and ISO), so creating a document with the same content on any software should result in identical files (only differing in the name of the software where it was produced)

I believe ODF 1.2 Extended means each editor can extend as appropriate which can lead to inconsistencies (a bit like Microsoft's XML files only work perfectly if you are using exactly the same version as it was saved)

> I remember seeing some differences already.

I have found the same even in very simple documents.
Again, if Extended means what I described, that is expected...

So the only logic thing for AOO to do is to jump from 1.2 to 1.3 and forget about Extended?
Or are there any Extended bits in AOO's format that need to be preserved (and are not included in 1.3)?

Regards,
Pedro

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Regina Henschel
In reply to this post by Rory O'Farrell
Hi Rory,

Rory O'Farrell schrieb am 09-Feb-20 um 17:29:
> Is there a document from Oasis giving a synopsis of the changes from 1.2 to 1.3?  This would give an  idea of how much work was involved in the transition from 1.2.

No, such synopsis does not exist. The committee candidate has an
appendix which lists the issues, which were incorporated, and the relax
schema has comments at the element/attributes by which issue they are
effected.

Besides a lot of errata and clearing precedency of attributes and
clearing corner cases, I see these new things in ODF 1.3 for example:
several changes and additions in number formats
several additions to charts, e.g new kind of interpolation and of
regression curve
additional print option in Calc
PGP encryption

Example of things implemented in AOO and now in ODF 1.3:
attribute table:tab-color (Calc)
element chart:coordinate-region

You can compare the namespaces actually written by AOO with the
namespaces listed in the ODF 1.3 specification candidate. Then you look
in the core to which elements and attributes such own namespace is
written. Then you take that element or attribute and look in the
appendix of the ODF 1.3 specification, whether it is affected.

Kind regards
Regina




---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: New Challange ODF 1.3 is out

Rory O'Farrell
On Sun, 9 Feb 2020 19:54:56 +0100
Regina Henschel <[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi Rory,
>
> Rory O'Farrell schrieb am 09-Feb-20 um 17:29:
> > Is there a document from Oasis giving a synopsis of the changes from 1.2 to 1.3?  This would give an  idea of how much work was involved in the transition from 1.2.
>
> No, such synopsis does not exist. The committee candidate has an
> appendix which lists the issues, which were incorporated, and the relax
> schema has comments at the element/attributes by which issue they are
> effected.
>
> Besides a lot of errata and clearing precedency of attributes and
> clearing corner cases, I see these new things in ODF 1.3 for example:
> several changes and additions in number formats
> several additions to charts, e.g new kind of interpolation and of
> regression curve
> additional print option in Calc
> PGP encryption
>
> Example of things implemented in AOO and now in ODF 1.3:
> attribute table:tab-color (Calc)
> element chart:coordinate-region
>
> You can compare the namespaces actually written by AOO with the
> namespaces listed in the ODF 1.3 specification candidate. Then you look
> in the core to which elements and attributes such own namespace is
> written. Then you take that element or attribute and look in the
> appendix of the ODF 1.3 specification, whether it is affected.
>
> Kind regards
> Regina

Thank you, Regina - a helpful summary.

--
Rory O'Farrell <[hidden email]>

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]