DOCSLIB.ORG

ODF Workshop

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
ODF Workshop ODF Workshop ODF: The Past, Present and Future Michael Brauer, Sun, ODF TC Chair ODF Accessibility Pete Brunet, IBM, ODF Accessibility Subcommittee ODF Programmability Rob Weir, IBM, ODF TC Michael Brauer, Sun, ODF TC Chair ODF Interoperability Alan Clark, Novell, ODF Adoption TC Rob Weir, IBM, ODF TC ODF Adoption Don Harbison, IBM, ODF Adoption TC Co-Chair OASIS OpenDocument ISO/IEC 26300 The Past, the Present, and the Future Michael Brauer Technical Architect Software Engineering StarOffice/OpenOffice.org Sun Microsystems About the Speaker Technical Architect in Sun Microsystem's OpenOffice.org/StarOffice development OpenOffice.org/StarOffice developer since 1995 Main focus: Office application development/file formats and XML technologies OpenOffice.org XML project owner OASIS OpenDocument Technical Committee chair Agenda The Past - History of OASIS OpenDocument format The Present – Sub Committees, Work in Progress The Future – OpenDocument v1.2 The Past 1999 Development of “StarOffice XML” file format starts Primary goal: interoperability 2000 Sun contributes StarOffice to OpenOffice.org “StarOffice XML” becomes “OpenOffice.org XML” open source community project First OpenOffice.org XML working draft publicly available 2001 OpenOffice.org XML is used as default file format for OpenOffice.org 1.0/Sun StarOffice 6.0 software 2002 Foundation of OASIS OpenDocument Technical Committee (TC) Basis of TC's work: OpenOffice.org XML file format OpenDocument TC Charter (Extract) The purpose [...] is to create an open, XML-based file format specification for office applications. [it] must meet the following requirements: it must be suitable for office documents containing text, spreadsheets, charts, and graphical documents, it must retain high-level information suitable for editing the document, it must be friendly to transformations using XSLT or similar XML-based languages or tools, it should 'borrow' from similar, existing standards wherever possible and permitted. OpenDocument TC Charter (Summary) Vendor independence Interoperability between office applications between office applications and other solution Simplicity for file format users Solid basis for the future How OpenDocument Does It Reuses standards XHTML, SVG, SMIL, XSL, XForms, MathML, XLink and Dublin Core Meta Initiative Reuses its own schema fragments One paragraph schema, one table schema, one graphical object schema, etc. Benefits Easy to transform and learn Expressive schema Compact specification (only ~700 pages) The Past (Continued) 2004 Committee Drafts 1 and 2 publicly available 2005 Name change to “OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument)” Previous name: OASIS Open Office XML TC Emphasizes application and use case independence Also called “ODF” 2005 OpenDocument v1.0 gets approved as OASIS standard The Past (Continued) 2005 (OASIS) OpenDocument submitted to ISO Foundation Of Accessibility Sub Committee 2006 Foundation Of Formula Sub Committee Foundation Of Metadata Sub Committee Foundation of ODF Adoption TC OpenDocument v1.0 gets published as ISO/IEC 26300 The Present 2007 OpenDocument v1.1 gets approved as OASIS standard Includes Enhancements for Accessibility OpenDocument v1.2 is worked on Within the three SCs: Accessibility, Metadata, Formula Within the main TC First OpenDocument v1.2 drafts get published The Accessibility Sub Committee Purpose (extracted from charter) To liaise with the disability community to gather accessibility related feedback on [...] OpenDocument v1.0 To gather [...] feedback from implementors To produce a formal accessibility evaluation of the OpenDocument v1.0 file format. SC membership includes many accessibility experts The Accessibility Evaluation Completed May 2006 Lists 9 accessibility issues for ODF v1.0 If these are resolved, the SC believes that OpenDocument will meet or exceed the accessibility support provided in all other office file formats as well as that specified in the W3C Web Content Accessibility Guidelines 1.0. Examples: No alternative text for non-text image map elements No alternative text for drawing objects No clear relationships between drawing objects and their captions No tables in presentations The Accessibility Sub Committee Status 8 issues were resolved in ODF v1.1 1 issue will be resolved in ODF v1.2 “Table Shape” for presentations An accessible workaround does exist for ODF v1.0/v1.1 SC agreed to continue its work after v1.1 was completed Ongoing accessibility review of ODF v1.2, ... Implementation guidelines are in progress The Formula Sub Committee (OpenFormula) Purpose (extracted from charter) To create a [standardized] specification for a formula language that should be used in OpenDocument spreadsheet documents [..] Status OpenFormula draft is available publicly Specification is nearly complete and in the stabilization phase OpenDocument and OpenFormula OpenDocument v1.0 Supports arbitrary spreadsheet formula languages Identification through XML namespaces Does not define its own formula language Uses non-standardized but well-defined formula languages OpenFormula Will be a separate specification document Is usable with OpenDocument v1.0 and v1.1 Will become OpenDocument v1.2's standardized and recommended formula language Others formula languages remain usable Example: formula languages tailored to customer use cases Metadata Sub Committee Purpose (extracted from charter) To gather use cases for the application of metadata in OpenDocument documents To propose metadata related enhancements What is Metadata? Structured data about data, that Describes, explains, locates, or otherwise makes it easier to retrieve, use, or manage an information resource Typically used to describe documents, images, contacts, events, and so forth Metadata Sub Committee Why is Metadata important? Allows authors to encode his/her human intelligence into the documents Enables powerful automated solutions Standards based replacement for custom/user-defined XML markup within office documents Status Use case and Requirements document is available First Proposal is available Based on W3C RDF and W3C RDF/XML Metadata, Forms, Custom Schemas Office versus Custom Schema Office Schema: Schema/markup for office documents Tailored to office documents, Feature complete Custom Schema: Any other schema/markup interleaved with office schema Standard schemas (UBL, etc.) or user defined schemas: Defined by customer (Bills, orders, etc.) Used to store information not covered by office schema Use cases for custom schemas XML based data entry forms Metadata Metadata, Forms, Custom Schemas Custom schemas Feature of XML and XML Namespaces inherently supported by the OpenDocument Only one of many solutions for forms/metadata Data entry forms in OpenDocument OpenDocument v1.0 supports W3C XForms Clean separation of form instance and office markup Standardized solution Metadata in OpenDocument Will be based on RDF Standardized solution The Future OpenDocument v1.2 Includes A formula specification A meta data specification Many other enhancements that • Are new office application features • Improve interoperability with ECMA-376 (OOXML) Will be reviewed by Accessibility SC Aimed to be finished 2007 Planned to be re-submitted to ISO ODF Accessibility Guidelines Questions & Answers OASIS OpenDocument ISO/IEC 26300 The Past, the Present, and the Future Michael Brauer [email protected] OpenDocument Format - Accessibility Pete Brunet Accessibility Software Engineer IBM Software Group © 2007 IBM Corporation ODF Accessibility – Initial Problem In Federal Government bids software must be accessible by Persons with Disabilities. Section 508 – US Rehabilitation Act Now becoming important for States, e.g.Commonwealth of Massachusetts Also California, Texas, Minnesota ODF Accessibility issues were highlighted by Microsoft lobbyists in Massachusetts. Leaders from IBM worked with the ODF TC to form the Accessibility SC (see next slide). OASIS ODF AccSC was formed and responded very quickly. Committee Formed IBM – Rich Schwerdtfeger (co-chair), Dr. Chieko Asakawa, Dr. Hiro Takagi, Pete Brunet Sun – Peter Korn (co-chair), Malte Timmerman Design Science – Steve Nobel The Paciello Group – Mike Paciello Capital Accessibility – Janina Sajka Institute of Community Inclusion – David Clark Royal National Institute for the Blind – Dave Pawson New member: Duxbury Systems (Braille translators) GAP Analysis The Accessibility Subcommittee (AccSC) was formed in January 26, 2006. A GAP analysis was conducted. Comparison to W3C WCAG 1.0 and the Microsoft Office suite Nine issues were identified and submitted to the TC during May 2006. Influence of Notes 8 Spec effort helped by IBM's implementation of ODF into Notes 8 during 2006. Additional issues were encountered and fixed in the spec, e.g. usage of table headers. Both spec and implementation were improved due to development in parallel. Nine Recommendations Soft page breaks - for transformation to talking book formats, e.g. DAISY Usage of table row/column headers clarified – important for orientation for users who are blind Logical navigation order for presentation – keyboard navigation order was usually not correct Alternative text for graphical objects, image maps, drawing layers and hyperlinks (4 recommendations) – descriptions needed by users who are blind Association of captions to captioned content – helps screen readers find
Load more

Recommended publications
  • XXX Format Assessment
    Digital Preservation Assessment: Date: 20/09/2016 Preservation Open Document Text (ODT) Format Team Preservation Assessment Version: 1.0 Open Document Text (ODT) Format Preservation Assessment Document History Date Version Author(s) Circulation 20/09/2016 1.0 Michael Day, Paul Wheatley External British Library Digital Preservation Team [email protected] This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License. Page 1 of 12 Digital Preservation Assessment: Date: 20/09/2016 Preservation Open Document Text (ODT) Format Team Preservation Assessment Version: 1.0 1. Introduction This document provides a high-level, non-collection specific assessment of the OpenDocument Text (ODT) file format with regard to preservation risks and the practicalities of preserving data in this format. The OpenDocument Format is based on the Extensible Markup Language (XML), so this assessment should be read in conjunction with the British Library’s generic format assessment of XML [1]. This assessment is one of a series of format reviews carried out by the British Library’s Digital Preservation Team. Some parts of this review have been based on format assessments undertaken by Paul Wheatley for Harvard University Library. An explanation of the criteria used in this assessment is provided in italics below each heading. [Text in italic font is taken (or adapted) from the Harvard University Library assessment] 1.1 Scope This document will primarily focus on the version of OpenDocument Text defined in OpenDocument Format (ODF) version 1.2, which was approved as ISO/IEC 26300-1:2015 by ISO/IEC JTC1/SC34 in June 2015 [2]. Note that this assessment considers format issues only, and does not explore other factors essential to a preservation planning exercise, such as collection specific characteristics, that should always be considered before implementing preservation actions.
    [Show full text]
  • International Standard Iso/Iec 26300-2
    This is a previewINTERNATIONAL - click here to buy the full publication ISO/IEC STANDARD 26300-2 First edition 2015-07-01 Information technology — Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.2 — Part 2: Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format Technologies de l’information — Format de document ouvert pour applications de bureau (OpenDocument) v1.2 — Partie 2: Titre manque Reference number ISO/IEC 26300-2:2015(E) © ISO/IEC 2015 ISO/IEC 26300-2:2015(E) This is a preview - click here to buy the full publication COPYRIGHT PROTECTED DOCUMENT © ISO/IEC 2015 All rights reserved. Unless otherwise specified, no part of this publication may be reproduced or utilized otherwise in any form orthe by requester. any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, or posting on the internet or an intranet, without prior written permission. Permission can be requested from either ISO at the address below or ISO’s member body in the country of Case postale 56 • CH-1211 Geneva 20 ISOTel. copyright+ 41 22 749 office 01 11 Fax + 41 22 749 09 47 Web www.iso.org E-mail [email protected] Published in Switzerland ii © ISO/IEC 2015 – All rights reserved This is a preview - click here to buy the full publication ISO/IEC 26300-2:2015(E) Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 Part 2: Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format OASIS Standard 29 September 2011 Specification URIs: This version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.odt (Authoritative) http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.pdf
    [Show full text]
  • A Key for Document Interoperability?
    ELAN Electronic Government and Applications Feature Based Document Profiling - A Key for Document Interoperability? Bibliografische Information der Deutschen Nationalbibliothek: Die Deutsche Nationalbibliothek verzeichnet diese Publikation in der Deutschen Nationalbibliografie; detaillierte bibliografische Daten sind im Internet über http://dnb.d-nb.deabrufbar. 1.Auflage Juni 2012 Alle Rechte vorbehalten © Fraunhofer-Institut für Offene Kommunikationssysteme FOKUS, Juni 2012 Fraunhofer-Institut für Offene Kommunikationssysteme FOKUS Kaiserin-Augusta-Allee31 10589 Berlin Telefon: +49-30-3436-7115 Telefax: +49-30-3436-8000 [email protected] www.fokus.fraunhofer.de Dieses Werk ist einschließlich aller seiner Teile urheberrechtlich geschützt. Jede Ver- wertung, die über die engen Grenzen des Urheberrechtsgesetzes hinausgeht, ist ohne schriftliche Zustimmung des Instituts unzulässig und strafbar. Dies gilt insbesondere für Vervielfältigungen, Übersetzungen, Mikroverfilmungen sowie die Speicherung in elektronischen Systemen. Die Wiedergabe von Warenbezeichnungen und Handels- namen in diesem Buch berechtigt nicht zu der Annahme, dass solche Bezeichnungen im Sinne der Warenzeichen-und Markenschutz-Gesetzgebung als frei zu betrachten wären und deshalb von jedermann benutzt werden dürften. Soweit in diesem Werk direkt oder indirekt auf Gesetze, Vorschriften oder Richt-linien (z.B. DIN, VDI) Bezug genommen oder aus ihnen zitiert worden ist, kann das Institut keine Gewähr für Richtigkeit, Vollständigkeit oder Aktualität übernehmen. ISBN 978-3-00-038675-6
    [Show full text]
  • Comparing Libreoffice and Apache Openoffice Libreoffice and Apache Openoffice Both Are Derived from the Former Openoffice.Org Project
    Comparing LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice both are derived from the former OpenOffice.org project. Over the years, the differences have grown and these documents offer a list of all the changes. This document is the starting point for the information comparing the two office suites. Time line showing the various releases AOO 3.4 4.0 4.1 LO 3.3 3.4 3.5 3.6 4.0 4.1 4.2 4.3 4.4 … 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 2010 2011 2012 2103 2014 2015 Each ApacheOpenOffice release gets one update Each LibreOffice release typically gets 6 or 7 updates links to release information wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/3.4 wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/3.5 cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+3.4+Release+Notes wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/3. 6 wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/ 4.0 cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+ 4 . 0 +Release+Notes wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/ 4.1 wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/ 4.2 cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OOOUSERS/AOO+ 4 . 1 +Release+Notes wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/ 4.3 wiki.documentfoundation.org/ReleaseNotes/ 4.4 Simply the office suites are composed of 3 'layers' 1.
    [Show full text]
  • Open Document Format for Office Applications (Opendocument) Version 1.2
    Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 Part 2: Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format OASIS Standard 29 September 2011 Specification URIs: This version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.odt (Authoritative) http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/os/OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2.html Previous version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/csd06/OpenDocument-v1.2-csd06-part2.odt (Authoritative) http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/csd06/OpenDocument-v1.2-csd06-part2.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/csd06/OpenDocument-v1.2-csd06-part2.html Latest version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.odt (Authoritative) http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.html Technical Committee: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC Chairs: Rob Weir, IBM Michael Brauer, Oracle Corporation Editors: OpenDocument-v1.2-os-part2 29 September 2011 Copyright © OASIS Open 2002 - 2011. All Rights Reserved. Standards Track Work Product Page 1 of 234 David A. Wheeler Patrick Durusau Eike Rathke, Oracle Corporation Rob Weir, IBM Related work: This document is part of the OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 specification. The OpenDocument v1.2 specification has these parts: OpenDocument v1.2 part 1: OpenDocument Schema OpenDocument v1.2 part 2: Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format (this part) OpenDocument v1.2 part 3: Packages Declared XML namespaces: None.
    [Show full text]
  • Libreoffice 7.1 Calc Guide | 3 Chart Wizard
    Copyright This document is Copyright © 2021 by the LibreOffice Documentation Team. Contributors are listed below. You may distribute it and/or modify it under the terms of either the GNU General Public License (http://www.gnu.org/licenses/gpl.html), version 3 or later, or the Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), version 4.0 or later. All trademarks within this guide belong to their legitimate owners. Contributors To this edition Steve Fanning Felipe Viggiano Kees Kriek Jean Hollis Weber Vasudev Narayanan To previous editions John A Smith Jean Hollis Weber Martin J Fox Andrew Pitonyak Simon Brydon Gabriel Godoy Barbara Duprey Gabriel Godoy Peter Schofield John A Smith Christian Chenal Laurent Balland-Poirier Philippe Clément Pierre-Yves Samyn Shelagh Manton Peter Kupfer Andy Brown Stephen Buck Iain Roberts Hazel Russman Barbara M. Tobias Jared Kobos Martin Saffron Dave Barton Olivier Hallot Cathy Crumbley Kees Kriek Claire Wood Steve Fanning Zachary Parliman Gordon Bates Leo Moons Randolph Gamo Drew Jensen Samantha Hamilton Annie Nguyen Felipe Viggiano Stefan Weigel Feedback Please direct any comments or suggestions about this document to the Documentation Team’s mailing list: [email protected]. Note Everything you send to a mailing list, including your email address and any other personal information that is written in the message, is publicly archived and cannot be deleted. Publication date and software version Published May 2021. Based on LibreOffice 7.1 Community. Other
    [Show full text]
  • Hisham Hashem Muhammad Dataflow Semantics For
    Hisham Hashem Muhammad Dataflow Semantics for End-user Programmable Applications Tese de Doutorado Thesis presented to the Programa de Pós–graduação em Informática da PUC–Rio in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doutor em Informática. Advisor: Prof. Roberto Ierusalimschy Rio de Janeiro April 2017 Hisham Hashem Muhammad Dataflow Semantics for End-user Programmable Applications Thesis presented to the Programa de Pós–graduação em Informática da PUC–Rio in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doutor em Informática. Ap- proved by the undersigned Examination Committee. Prof. Roberto Ierusalimschy Advisor Departamento de Informática – PUC–Rio Prof. Renato Fontoura de Gusmão Cerqueira IBM Research – Brazil Profª. Raquel Oliveira Prates Departamento de Ciência da Computação – UFMG Prof. Edward Hermann Haeusler Departamento de Informática – PUC-Rio Profª. Simone Diniz Junqueira Barbosa Departamento de Informática – PUC-Rio Prof. Márcio da Silveira Carvalho Vice Dean of Graduate Studies – PUC–Rio Rio de Janeiro, April the 28th, 2017 All rights reserved. Hisham Hashem Muhammad The author graduated in Computer Science from Universidade do Vale do Rio dos Sinos — Unisinos in 2002, and obtained the degree of Mestre at Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro — PUC-Rio in 2006. He obtained the degree of Doutor at PUC-Rio in 2017, where he worked in the field of programming languages. Bibliographic data Hashem Muhammad, Hisham Dataflow Semantics for End-user Programmable Ap- plications / Hisham Hashem Muhammad; advisor: Ro- berto Ierusalimschy. – 2017. v., 184 f: il. color. ; 30 cm Tese (doutorado) - Pontifícia Universidade Católica do Rio de Janeiro, Departamento de Informática. Inclui bibliografia 1.
    [Show full text]
  • TOWARD XML-BASED OFFICE DOCUMENTS Contents 1. What Is
    TOWARD XML-BASED OFFICE DOCUMENTS (A BRIEF INTRODUCTION) JACEK POLEWCZAK Contents 1. What is happening? 1 2. Changing attitudes 2 3. ODF 3 4. OOXML 4 5. What about PDF? 6 6. Conclusions and recommendations 6 References 7 1. What is happening? Recent trends in office document formats indicate a move towards open and standard-based XML formats. Major government agencies and public and private institutions started look- ing for office documents formats that assure compatibility with open standards, that are vendor neutral, cross-platform interoperable, and non-binary (i.e., XML-based). Although the pressure to embrace open file formats has been felt for many years, Microsoft, with the dominant role in office documents formats, has been reluctant to move from its pro- prietary, binary formats to open document standards. The situation only seemingly changed in November 2005 when Microsoft, with a number of industry partners and supporters, took steps to produce an open specification for their own Office file formats. In December 2006, the specification was approved by ECMA International (European Association for Standard- izing Information and Communication systems) as ECMA-376: Office Open File Formats (OOXML). In April 2008, OOXML (as ISO/IEC DIS 29500) received necessary votes in the ISO (International Organization for Standardization) for approval as an international standard. However, in developing OOXML, Microsoft have chosen not to support ISO/IEC 26300: Open Document Format for Office Applications (ODF), submitted to ISO by OASIS (Or- ganization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards), and approved by ISO as international standard in May 2006. The benefits of OOXML, Microsoft argued, are concentrated on backwards compatibility with its legacy binary file formats.
    [Show full text]
  • A Comparative Study for Open Document Formats R
    A Comparative Study for Open Document Formats R. Mohamed Abdel Azim*, H. Farouk Ali** Project Manager, eContent program eContent Initiative Director, eContent program Ministry of Communication & Information Technology (MCIT), Cairo, Egypt Abstract — Many technical specifications that are restrict their use of the term "standard" to technologies sometimes considered standards are proprietary rather than approved by formalized committees that are open to being open, and are only available under restrictive contract participation by all interested parties and operate on a terms (if they can be obtained at all) from the organization that consensus basis, while others do not. owns the copyright for the specification. In this paper, we present a comparative study for the most common open An open format is a published specification for storing document format, OASIS Open Document Format and digital data, usually maintained by a non-proprietary Microsoft OXML standards organization, and free of legal restrictions on use. For example, an open format must be implementable Index Terms — Open Standards, XML, Open XML, by both proprietary and free/open source software, Open Format, OASIS, Open Office using the typical licenses used by each. In contrast to open formats, proprietary formats are controlled and I. INTRODUCTION defined by private interests. Open formats are a subset of open standards. Open Standards are publicly available and The primary goal of open formats is to guarantee long- implementable standards. By allowing anyone to obtain term
    [Show full text]
  • Suggestions for Interoperability Undertaking
    Ms. Neelie Kroes Commissioner DG COMPETITION Bourgetlaan 1 1140 Evere Bruxelles/Brussel SUBJECT: Suggestions for Interoperability Undertaking The Hague, September 28th 2009 Dear Commissioner Kroes, We read with interest the article in several media published last week1 where you were quoted as saying that the Commission is near to closing a deal on a number of issues in the case against Microsoft. We think that this inquiry is of great importance, and that restoring a level playing field in this area is essential for the future ambitions of Europe. On behalf of OpenDoc Society we would like to respond to the "Interoperability Undertaking"-proposal2 from Microsoft that was made to the European Commission, hoping that this will be of help to you in finding effective remedies to the issues that matter most in this case. OpenDoc Society is an international member-based not-for-profit organisation headquartered in Europe, with individual and organisational members around the planet. Our organisational members range from large software vendors and open source communities to small and medium sized enterprises, from (also European) government organisations to academia and research, and from education and cultural institutions up to special needs groups, registered charities and the military. Our goal is to promote best practises for productivity applications, most notably in the area of open standards, document exchange and processing. In this document, we will respond to the Undertaking from our expert knowledge in this domain and make a number of proposals to improve that document in order to make it effective given the purposes it is drafted for.
    [Show full text]
  • XML-Based Office Document Standards by Walter Ditch
    Technology & Standards Watch XML-based Office Document Standards by Walter Ditch Version 1.0 First published August 2007 Publisher JISC: Bristol, UK Copyright owner Higher Education Funding Council for England To make sure you are reading the latest version of this report, you should always download it from the original source. Original source http://www.jisc.ac.uk/techwatch © HEFCE 2007 JISC Technology and Standards Watch, Aug. 2007 XML-based Office Documents Executive Summary Historically, standardisation of the office document formats we use in our everyday working environment has been achieved through the widespread adoption of products from a very small number of suppliers. Initially this was helpful as it meant that a kind of de facto interoperability was achieved, but it has also created a form of vendor lock-in, which requires users to have purchased a particular brand of software product in order to be able to undertake everyday office tasks. This use of de facto, proprietary standards has become increasingly unacceptable, especially within the public sector, where information has to be provided to members of the public without requiring them to have bought software from a particular vendor. Policy moves from within the EU and elsewhere are driving the use of open standards to encourage open and inclusive document exchange. With current trends in office document file formats showing a strong move towards open, standards-based XML formats and away from closed solutions, and with major government and corporate software contracts increasingly demanding compatibility with open standards (many of which are based on the ubiquitous XML), competing software vendors have understandably been keen to have their own preferred office file formats endorsed as open standards.
    [Show full text]
  • Opendocument V1.2 Part 2 (This Part): Recalculated Formula (Openformula) Format Opendocument V1.2 Part 3: Packages
    Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 Part 2: Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format Committee Draft 05 19 June 2010 Specification URIs: This Version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/cd05/OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2.odt (Authoritative) http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/cd05/OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/cd05/OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2.html Previous Version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.1/OS/OpenDocument-v1.1.odt http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.1/OS/OpenDocument-v1.1.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.1/OS/OpenDocument-v1.1-html/OpenDocument- v1.1.html Latest Version: http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.odt http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.pdf http://docs.oasis-open.org/office/v1.2/OpenDocument-v1.2-part2.html Technical Committee: OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) TC Chairs: Robert Weir, IBM Michael Brauer, Oracle Corporation Editors: David A. Wheeler <[email protected]>, OpenDocument-v1.2-cd05-part2 19 June 2010 Copyright © OASIS Open 2002 - 2010. All Rights Reserved. Page 1 of 233 Patrick Durusau <[email protected]> Eike Rathke, Oracle Corporation <[email protected]> Robert Weir, IBM <[email protected]> Related Work: This document is part of the OASIS Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) Version 1.2 specification. The OpenDocument v1.2 specification has these parts: OpenDocument v1.2 part 1; OpenDocument Schema OpenDocument v1.2 part 2 (this part): Recalculated Formula (OpenFormula) Format OpenDocument v1.2 part 3: Packages Declared XML Namespaces: None.
    [Show full text]