[odf-discuss] Documenting support for ODF 1.1?

[M. Fioretti]

On Thu, May 31, 2007 11:44:12 AM +0200, Daniel
(daniel.carrera at zmsl.com) wrote:

> >if there is no application that already fully supports ODF 1.1
> >_today_,
> 
> Damm it, do you understand the difference between supporting an
> accessibility feature and being accessible?

Yes. Very well, thank you. And my question means exactly what it
means: is there any (desktop) application _today_ which fully supports
ODF 1.1, that is that can:

1) produce fully valid, well formed ODF 1.1 files
2) open and display such files

if not, then some law proposals and regulations under discussion may
have no chance to be approved or applied as they are, but should be
extended/reworded. And such a task would be much easier for newcomers
or part-time volunteers if they could find something more than this
"sigh..." and "damn it" attitude or geeky statements a-la "It's
important that everyone realize that the difference between 1.0 and
1.1 is very very small".

As I already noted, such statements are as correct as substantially
useless when the discussion becomes political/legal. You can't put

"the only acceptable document formats are those which support all the
accessibility features required by law XYZ or those for which the
differences are "very very small""

in a law proposal or government regulation. Again, if there is nothing
more to add than this, there is really no need to continue this
discussion, thanks.

		Marco