[odf-discuss] A story of TIFF
peter at vandenabeele.com
Sun Feb 4 10:52:28 EST 2007
On 2/4/07, Thomas Zander <zander at kde.org> wrote:
> On Saturday 03 February 2007 16:50, Peter Vandenabeele wrote:
> > I doubt if such documents, while carrying the .odx extension, are really
> > "Open Standard" documents, in the sense of fully, openly and freely
> > specified.
> Well, yes and no.
> KWord and OOWriter both have options and features that are not (yet) in
> ODF-proper. This is to be expected as long as the standards group is not the
> same as the developers group.
> So, the solution is to allow several ways to put more data in the doc that
> others should not be bothered with. In fact, that's one of the basis of XML.
> So, in the technical respect its fully ODF compliant.
Certainly, but in my personal interpretation of ODF as a detailed
a _document format_ (and not just an XML container), it is not. That's why I
prefer to call such documents "ODFX", to make clear they contain blobs of data
for which the detailed specification of how to exactly interprete and render the
document is not in the ODF 1.0 spec. Maybe it is in ODF 1.2, but I don't have a
view into that.
Anyway, this is just a discussion over definitions of words, which is
More information about the odf-discuss