>
> That may be an option, but do we really need that? Why not just say that
> the default for ODF 1.2 are OpenFormula formulas. For different formula
> expressions, there still is the option to add a (short) namespace
> prefix. I mean, we have created OpenFormula to get a standardized
> formula specification for ODF. My expectation therefore is that
> implementors of ODF 1.2 support the formula specification, and that it
> is the exception that other formula languages are used. For that
> exceptions, it appears to be okay for me if a namespace prefix is
> required on each formula.
>
A default stated in the specification would work as well.
The question really is: If someone uses a different formula language (not
OpenFormula) what does this mean for conformance:
a) Is it non-conformant?
or
b) Is it conformant to the extended conformance class only?
I think most implementations are converging on OpenFormula in the ODF 1.2
time frame, though not all vendors are close to this in their ODF 1.1
support.
In any case, we could propose a) as a solution and then ask if any members
have strong objections to that approach.
-Rob