corinthia-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <>
Subject RE: ODF 1.2 links
Date Fri, 17 Jul 2015 18:49:10 GMT

The content of the ISO documents is the same as that of the original ones from OASIS.  However,
through some sort of mixup, one of the key OASIS ODF 1.2 Standard documents, and all of the
schemas, are omitted at ISO.

My recommendation is to continue to use the links that I have provided to the OASIS standards.
 The best way to obtain all of the material is to download the Zip that includes ODF versions
(good test documents!) and also PDF versions, along with all companion files (schemas) and
the HTML versions too.  That will show you how OpenOffice saves ODF document as HTML and how
it understand the HTML that it reads.


The detailed handling of ODF 1.0/1.1 compatibility is a little tricky and will take more explanation.
 It is important to realize that there are legacy documents in ODF 1.0/1.1 format (where the
differences between 1.0 and 1.1 are negligible) and some folks continue to use older versions
of processors that only accept/produce those versions of the format.

The ODF 1.1 standard is intended to be kept available, however the folks who set up the ISO
update failed to preserver the ODF 1.1 (with Errata) specification for download.

The ODF 1.1 specification is still available from OASIS, is still usable, and documents that
conform to ODF 1.1 are still in the wild.  Also, there are products, such as Microsoft Office
2007 SP2, that only support ODF 1.1.

I will add links to the latest ODF 1.1, with its Errata (show as tracked changes).  At the
moment, these are only available at OASIS since ISO managed to drop them from their "freely
available standards" list.  That may be corrected, but ISO moves slowly.

It is easily detectable when a document file is in ODF 1.1 instead of ODF 1.2 format.  Also,
for the most part, there are no breaking changes.  There are a couple of important ones and
our test documents should deal with those.  

In practice, there are also far more OpenOffice-only extensions in ODF 1.1 documents.  For
example, there were no spreadsheet formulas define in ODF 1.1 so you will see a custom namespace
in Calc ODF 1.1 documents.  The custom formula format is not the same as what
became OpenFormula in ODF 1.2, although there are many similarities and they are mainly upward
convertible.  Generally, however, one can safely treat an ODF 1.1 document the same as an
ODF 1.2 document, but you need to do more work if you want to preserve it as ODF 1.1 when
updating or creating from an ODF 1.2-oriented processor.

 - Dennis

-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [] 
Sent: Friday, July 17, 2015 08:30
Subject: Re: ODF 1.2 links

On 17 July 2015 at 17:22, Peter Kelly <> wrote:

> > On 17 Jul 2015, at 6:47 pm, jan i <> wrote:
> >
> > Hi.
> >
> > For those working on ODF this blog might be of interest.
> >
> >
> > I am thinking of updating our web pages to have the links to ISO
> included,
> > thoughts ?
> Yes, I think we should definitely do so.
> I wonder about compatibility issues we may have to address now with the
> multiple versions of ODF. If I recall correctly, some versions of MS Office
> only support an older version of the standard (I can’t remember if it was
> 1.0 or 1.1).
if was so, but has not been for some years.

> For those more familiar with the details of ODF versions - should we
> support conversion to specific versions of the formats? E.g. convert to ODF
> 1.1 or ODF 1.2, in case the user wants to open the document in an
> application that only supports the former?
ODF 1.2 has been around since 2011 as standard, but has just now been voted
in as ISO standard.

I think we only need to support ODF 1.2, BUT the question is still valid,
because ODF 1.2 allows "extensions" which are used by both AOO and LO. I
have also just
been informed (on AOO dev@) that ODF 1.3 is work in progress, but only very

In general we should be able to read (and due to our update method) also
write all versions, but I would not offer a converter between versions,
there are plenty out
there, so it is not really needed.

jan i.

> —
> Dr Peter M. Kelly
> PGP key: <>
> (fingerprint 5435 6718 59F0 DD1F BFA0 5E46 2523 BAA1 44AE 2966)

View raw message