The Relevancy of ODF 1.0
Dec 18, 2009, 14:17 (0 Talkback[s])
(Other stories by Rob Weir)
"Today, if you surveyed ODF implementations, you would find that
the preponderance of them write ODF 1.1 documents by default.
Twelve months ago many of them wrote out ODF 1.0 format, and in
another 12 months I predict most will be writing out ODF 1.2 format
"So what does this mean for ODF the standard?
"Every 5 years each ISO standard undergoes what is called
"Periodic Review". The outcome of this review is to classify the
standard as one of: confirmed, revised, stabilized or withdrawn. If
it is confirmed, it means the standard is of continued relevancy
and is still undergoing maintenance. Revised means it is currently
undergoing revision and periodic review is not necessary.
Stabilized means it "has ongoing validity and effectiveness but is
mature and insofar as can be determined will not require further
maintenance of any sort". And a standard is withdrawn (the most
extreme option) if it has been declared unsafe, has a non-RAND
patent asserted against it, or is "no longer in use".
"Some of the nattering nabobs in SC34 (e.g., Alex Brown) are
floating the idea that ODF 1.0 should be withdrawn from ISO,
claiming it is not implemented and not relevant. At the recent SC34
meeting in Paris this view was echoed by a Microsoft participant
(one of many) in the meeting, who additionally urged that a motion
to withdraw ODF 1.0 be brought forward at the Stockholm SC34
Plenary in March."