Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2010 Archives by date, by thread · List index

Gianluca Turconi wrote:
Il 01/11/2010 23.51, Thorsten Behrens ha scritto:
So I guess moving on&  extending ODF is a feature, not a bug - of
course, for those who need it, you want a "strict mode" (which we

Extending ODF *in agreement with* at least two other vendors is a
feature, because you're reasonably sure that feature will be
implemented in ODF specification.

Hi Gianluca,

yeah, that was implied - having two other vendors on board is the
best way to get enough votes for your additions in the ODF TC.

Simply extending ODF (with good features, of course) on a vendor
basis is just fragmentation, IMO.

A healthy dose of vendor-specific extensions is one of the hallmarks
of a working ecosystem, if you ask me - at least if you want for ODF
to be the default document format. ;)

Fragmentation is only a problem, if you end up with lock-in - maybe
an opportunity for ODF Next to re-evaluate its mechanisms for
extensibility & fallbacks.


-- Thorsten

Unsubscribe instructions: Email to
Posting guidelines:
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.