Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2013 Archives by date, by thread · List index

As far as I can gather, neither OASIS nor the ODF Technical Committee
require a reference implementation, so none has been named. I don't
know about the ISO standard, but I would assume this applies there too.

That said, OO.o/LO would be considered by most as the reference
implementation. As a "reference implementation", there generally isn't
going to be more than one (otherwise, which one would you refer to when
they differed?).

However, here is a list of software implementing the format:

As a side note, the competing MS format also doesn't have a reference
implementation. The only implementation that I am aware of is MSO,
which, being proprietary, cannot be a reference, as nobody (other than
MSO themselves) can see the code. And it has much bigger problems than
just a lack of a reference implementation.


On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 02:52:20 +0700
"Urmas" <> wrote:


Don't worry, you can safely ignore Urmas, he's a known troll around
these parts;

You're welcome to name a full reference implementation of ODF format
not using the OO.o/Staroffice code. 

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


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.