3 ms·
The spec isn't actually self-consistent, so it's not clear that it can ever actually be implemented: http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080328090328998
by nobodyorother 9y ago
The spec isn't actually self-consistent, so it's not clear that it can ever actually be implemented:
http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080328090328998 http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080328090328998
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20070117145745854 http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?stor...
- emodendroket 9y agoYour source claims the spec contradicts previous adapted ISO standards, not that it contradicts itself (which is what I assume you mean by it not being self-consistent). It does, however, raise the issue of bits like legacy compatibility for Word 97 behavior and scripts not being documented.
- nobodyorother 9y agoWell, no, it is self-inconsistent in places [0]. However, as you mention, those are probably minor points compared to how it contradicts existing standards, like the Gregorian calendar [1], date representation, and language codes. 0: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070123071154671#Internal_inconsistencies:_the_w:sz_element http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070123071154... 1: http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070123071154671#Ecma_376_contradicts_numerous_international_standards http://www.groklaw.net/articlebasic.php?story=20070123071154...
- emodendroket 9y agoThose are annoyances and give increased complexity. They are not, as you described earlier, inconsistencies that make the spec impossible to implement.