OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC

  • 1.  Question regarding ODF 1.2 specification name

    Posted 05-11-2010 10:21
    Mary,
    
    so far the OpenDocument TC approved the three parts of the ODF 1.2
    specification individually as committee drafts, and has send them out
    for public review individually. That is, we have an
    
    OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd4, an OpenDocument-v1.2-part2-cd2 and an
    OpenDocument-v1.2-part3-cd1.
    
    Because the three parts of the ODF 1.2 specification shall become one
    single OASIS standard, we now want to approve the three parts as a 
    single committee draft, and we also want to send them out for a single 
    public review that covers all three parts.
    
    What is the correct name that the new CD would get when approved, and
    what would be the names of the three parts?
    
    Is the correct name for whole specification
    
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01
    
    and for the three parts:
    
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part1
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part2
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part3
    
    Could we also start with a cd05? That is:
    
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05
    
    for the whole specification, and for the three parts:
    
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part1
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2
    OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part3
    
    This may avoid confusion caused by the fact that we had already cd1
    specifications for the three individual parts.
    
    Best regards
    
    Michael
    
    -- 
    Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    
    Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz
    
    


  • 2.  Re: [office] Question regarding ODF 1.2 specification name

    Posted 05-11-2010 18:30
    Hi Michael,
    
      I think we've only sent 2 parts out for public review so far: Part I and Part 3. I don't believe Part 2 has been submitted for public review yet. That really doesn't matter though, if you're in effect creating a new document.
    
    Will you be merging into a single, comprehensive document? Or will you be creating an overview document that then ties together the 3 parts?
    
    Since Part I was a CD04 you couldn't rename it back to CD01; CD05 makes sense as long as one of the parts hasn't reached that level yet.
    
    Regards,
    
    Mary
    
    
    
    On May 11, 2010, at 6:20 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
    
    > Mary,
    > 
    > so far the OpenDocument TC approved the three parts of the ODF 1.2
    > specification individually as committee drafts, and has send them out
    > for public review individually. That is, we have an
    > 
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd4, an OpenDocument-v1.2-part2-cd2 and an
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-part3-cd1.
    > 
    > Because the three parts of the ODF 1.2 specification shall become one
    > single OASIS standard, we now want to approve the three parts as a single committee draft, and we also want to send them out for a single public review that covers all three parts.
    > 
    > What is the correct name that the new CD would get when approved, and
    > what would be the names of the three parts?
    > 
    > Is the correct name for whole specification
    > 
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01
    > 
    > and for the three parts:
    > 
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part1
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part2
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part3
    > 
    > Could we also start with a cd05? That is:
    > 
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05
    > 
    > for the whole specification, and for the three parts:
    > 
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part1
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2
    > OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part3
    > 
    > This may avoid confusion caused by the fact that we had already cd1
    > specifications for the three individual parts.
    > 
    > Best regards
    > 
    > Michael
    > 
    > -- 
    > Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    > StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    > Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    > D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    > http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    > http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    > 
    > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    > 	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    > Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    > Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz
    > 
    > 
    > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    > To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    > generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
    > https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    > 
    
    


  • 3.  Re: [office] Question regarding ODF 1.2 specification name

    Posted 05-12-2010 06:21
    Hi Mary,
    
    On 05/11/10 20:29, Mary McRae wrote:
    > Hi Michael,
    > 
    >   I think we've only sent 2 parts out for public review so far: Part I and Part 3. I don't believe Part 2 has been submitted for public review yet. That really doesn't matter though, if you're in effect creating a new document.
    
    That's true. Part 2 has not been send out for public review.
    > 
    > Will you be merging into a single, comprehensive document? Or will you be creating an overview document that then ties together the 3 parts?
    
    The three parts will remain separate documents. There is no separate 
    overview document, but an introduction in part 1 that explains what the 
    content of the three parts is.
    
    > 
    > Since Part I was a CD04 you couldn't rename it back to CD01; CD05 makes sense as long as one of the parts hasn't reached that level yet.
    
    Okay. CD05 actually is my preference, since renaming the parts back to 
    cd01 can only lead to confusion.
    
    Thank you for answering our questions.
    
    Best regards
    
    Michael
    
    
    
    
    
    
    > 
    > Regards,
    > 
    > Mary
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > On May 11, 2010, at 6:20 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
    > 
    >> Mary,
    >>
    >> so far the OpenDocument TC approved the three parts of the ODF 1.2
    >> specification individually as committee drafts, and has send them out
    >> for public review individually. That is, we have an
    >>
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd4, an OpenDocument-v1.2-part2-cd2 and an
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-part3-cd1.
    >>
    >> Because the three parts of the ODF 1.2 specification shall become one
    >> single OASIS standard, we now want to approve the three parts as a single committee draft, and we also want to send them out for a single public review that covers all three parts.
    >>
    >> What is the correct name that the new CD would get when approved, and
    >> what would be the names of the three parts?
    >>
    >> Is the correct name for whole specification
    >>
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01
    >>
    >> and for the three parts:
    >>
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part1
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part2
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part3
    >>
    >> Could we also start with a cd05? That is:
    >>
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05
    >>
    >> for the whole specification, and for the three parts:
    >>
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part1
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2
    >> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part3
    >>
    >> This may avoid confusion caused by the fact that we had already cd1
    >> specifications for the three individual parts.
    >>
    >> Best regards
    >>
    >> Michael
    >>
    >> -- 
    >> Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    >> StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    >> Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    >> D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    >> http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    >> http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    >>
    >> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    >> 	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    >> Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    >> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz
    >>
    >>
    >> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
    >> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    >>
    > 
    
    
    -- 
    Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    
    Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz
    


  • 4.  Re: [office] Question regarding ODF 1.2 specification name

    Posted 05-12-2010 13:46
    Hi Michael,
    
      If you do not create either an overview document or combine into a single document, then you do not have a single specification and it will require 3 separate ballots.
    
    Mary 
    
    
    
    On May 12, 2010, at 2:19 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
    
    > Hi Mary,
    > 
    > On 05/11/10 20:29, Mary McRae wrote:
    >> Hi Michael,
    >>  I think we've only sent 2 parts out for public review so far: Part I and Part 3. I don't believe Part 2 has been submitted for public review yet. That really doesn't matter though, if you're in effect creating a new document.
    > 
    > That's true. Part 2 has not been send out for public review.
    >> Will you be merging into a single, comprehensive document? Or will you be creating an overview document that then ties together the 3 parts?
    > 
    > The three parts will remain separate documents. There is no separate overview document, but an introduction in part 1 that explains what the content of the three parts is.
    > 
    >> Since Part I was a CD04 you couldn't rename it back to CD01; CD05 makes sense as long as one of the parts hasn't reached that level yet.
    > 
    > Okay. CD05 actually is my preference, since renaming the parts back to cd01 can only lead to confusion.
    > 
    > Thank you for answering our questions.
    > 
    > Best regards
    > 
    > Michael
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    > 
    >> Regards,
    >> Mary
    >> On May 11, 2010, at 6:20 AM, Michael Brauer - Sun Germany - ham02 - Hamburg wrote:
    >>> Mary,
    >>> 
    >>> so far the OpenDocument TC approved the three parts of the ODF 1.2
    >>> specification individually as committee drafts, and has send them out
    >>> for public review individually. That is, we have an
    >>> 
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-part1-cd4, an OpenDocument-v1.2-part2-cd2 and an
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-part3-cd1.
    >>> 
    >>> Because the three parts of the ODF 1.2 specification shall become one
    >>> single OASIS standard, we now want to approve the three parts as a single committee draft, and we also want to send them out for a single public review that covers all three parts.
    >>> 
    >>> What is the correct name that the new CD would get when approved, and
    >>> what would be the names of the three parts?
    >>> 
    >>> Is the correct name for whole specification
    >>> 
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01
    >>> 
    >>> and for the three parts:
    >>> 
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part1
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part2
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd01-part3
    >>> 
    >>> Could we also start with a cd05? That is:
    >>> 
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05
    >>> 
    >>> for the whole specification, and for the three parts:
    >>> 
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part1
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2
    >>> OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part3
    >>> 
    >>> This may avoid confusion caused by the fact that we had already cd1
    >>> specifications for the three individual parts.
    >>> 
    >>> Best regards
    >>> 
    >>> Michael
    >>> 
    >>> -- 
    >>> Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    >>> StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    >>> Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    >>> D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    >>> http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    >>> http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    >>> 
    >>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    >>> 	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    >>> Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    >>> Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz
    >>> 
    >>> 
    >>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
    >>> To unsubscribe from this mail list, you must leave the OASIS TC that
    >>> generates this mail.  Follow this link to all your TCs in OASIS at:
    >>> https://www.oasis-open.org/apps/org/workgroup/portal/my_workgroups.php
    >>> 
    > 
    > 
    > -- 
    > Michael Brauer, Technical Architect Software Engineering
    > StarOffice/OpenOffice.org
    > Sun Microsystems GmbH             Nagelsweg 55
    > D-20097 Hamburg, Germany          michael.brauer@sun.com
    > http://sun.com/staroffice         +49 40 23646 500
    > http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS
    > 
    > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Sun Microsystems GmbH, Sonnenallee 1,
    > 	   D-85551 Kirchheim-Heimstetten
    > Amtsgericht Muenchen: HRB 161028
    > Geschaeftsfuehrer: Jürgen Kunz