Public review of “The State of ODF Interoperability”

March 14, 2010

in ODF

The OASIS ODF Interoperability and Conformance TC has as a primary goal to:

Initially and periodically thereafter, to review the current state of conformance and interoperability among a number of ODF implementations; To produce reports on overall trends in conformance and interoperability that note areas of accomplishment as well as areas needing improvement, and to recommend prioritized activities for advancing the state of conformance and interoperability among ODF implementations in general without identifying or commenting on particular implementations;

The initial  “State of ODF Interoperability” report has now gone out for public review.  It is a baseline report, surveying the context of document interoperability, the sources of interoperability problems as well the ways in which these problems are being addressed.  Although it explicitly deals with ODF interoperability, much of the report is equally relevant to any other office document format, XML-based or binary.

If you want to participate in the public review,  you can find links to the  draft, as well as instructions for submitting comments, in the OASIS announcement of the review.

TwitterIdenti.caDeliciousDiigoDiggEmailFacebookInstapaperLinkedInRedditSlashdotStumbleUponShare
Creative Commons License
This work, unless otherwise expressly stated, is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 United States License.

Related posts:

  1. ODF 1.2, Part 3 goes out for Public Review
  2. ODF 1.2 Part 1 Public Review
  3. Introducing the ODF Interoperability and Conformance TC
  4. The State of ODF in OASIS
  5. ODF 1.2 Begins Final 60-day Public Review

{ 1 comment… read it below or add one }

1 Joshua Cogliati March 18, 2010 at 11:23 pm

Maybe someday, Open Office will have bug 90553 fixed, and I will be able to transfer odt files with complex equations back and forth with Microsoft Office and other ODT editors:
http://qa.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=90553

Leave a Comment

{ 2 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: