 So, welcome to the first afternoon track. I'm going to start with a little bit of a overview of what we are going to do here. I think it will be a state of the Union, so we'll have to look in the past and discuss the plans and sort of go to the store for the next year. So, that's me doing open office work and in-office work for a number of years. And, yeah, I'm going to be here for the TDA to do this initial tour. I'm currently working from CLE. I'm paying for the salary. I'm just going to come here and I'm also supporting the conference. Okay, so just to remind you, that's the year of the event, 2018. But we still have all the F1 to 2. So, it's been for who knows when we must have last, we must have the F1 to 2, ratified standardised playways. Anyone else? So, almost eight years. So, that's bigger. What do you know? First off, some history. As I say, 2011 was the year of 102. So, it started with the start of this XML format. So, it's a mistake. So, I decided that XML would be much better if we had a document format. I had to do a binding document format before, that is in the office. The office last day. So, the sun was inspected at the start of this open office team back in the day. Well, the first two came up with that idea. And they just draw the filter for the start of this format. And then some of you in the sun said, actually, we're much better than that. So, it's a great idea. This is a look for like some other people like to schema and validate. And you can tell how people start to read that. It's nicely documented. It's somewhat direct for the world of art. It's also direct for the office of project of the open office. It's nicely documented. So, that's when it started. So, you know, we were meeting in 2002. And rather quickly, we have 2002 then, out of the normal, 2005. And rather quick succession, roughly, I mean two and a half years, so it was an update. So, yeah. That suddenly stopped for good reasons in 2011. So, it's been languishing since then. And the problem with that is that it's not that the development is very stopped. So, there's still features being added. There's still problems being found in your specification. So, that's a mistake. We put up for a moment to roll all of this to understand it. So, that's what happened. So, nothing happened. Actually, quite a bit happened. Just that, you know. So, the ultimate goal of the standardization community, of course, is to go standards. And that's the problem that didn't happen. So, there was three concepts. So, first one is advance. Who knows what was the cost of the advance of human collaboration. Sorry. Oh, shit. So, the task there was that the change tracking marker within the bogey app is a bit underspecified. And it's not complete. So, this is quite an important part of this, especially tests. For text document interpretability, it was fast to work out a new standard of updates to the existence there. But then, through a total of three concepts, running on sort of the world, lots of energy, lots of time, and, of course, lots of minutes. And there's no update yet, but there's at least one, the last one for three concepts is built in the world now. And it's really having a break, I think, until later this year, between people. Let's move to the core of the issue, so that there's no accident at that right, especially for writing standards century stop in 2011. So, that coincides with the pretty much the end of the book, of course, and also the axle of the larger corporate responses of that project. And standardization work, especially writing standards are very good through all of bureaucracy. It's pretty tired every time and through some of the volunteers we've been doing. You usually get someone to be paid for that, but it's usually pretty expensive. So, just stop from that. Right. 1.3, that's the supposed to be next standard or some discussion to call it 1.3 or 2.0, since very likely the strange tracking thing won't make it for 1.3 of the next version. People decided to call it 1.3, because it's an iteration of a minor update, but so far it's been more than 350 issues worked on and get the individual target to be. So, that's quite a chunk of backlog. I'm reasonably certain that at least all of the 1.0 is much, much less in scope. So, I think 1.2 is the best. There's also a lot of debugging that was going on with the standard, lots of problems found, lots of under-specifying of ink here. We're already with the standard found, so, making mistakes, some errors that we just forgot to mention, and specify them all. Yes, and most of that was due to a massive backlog of improvements, especially in the middle of this, that then all went since we wanted to write at least the standard performance, that was then put into some separate namespace. So, when you're only a document, it's in the office, in the office namespace. But anyway, it's committed to putting things there to change existing things. And then you extend the file from what you need to some other store in your feature, you put it into a separate namespace, it's a good extended namespace, and you're documented on your product page that you have extended on the F, it's such a way, you can explain what you did there, and it's a feature, it's a marker. And of course, every vendor, every project is then strongly encouraged to have feedback back to come to the FTCs, that actually becomes a standard. Sometimes that just means finding the change in the marker, to propose some texts and pros for the written standard. Sometimes, there will be some larger discussions or other numbers to say, okay, there's some symbolism or some large feature, or someone wants to load it to that, there's a stupid idea, there's a marker already, what is that? So usually there's some discussion going on and I'm not even sure what to say. At the end, though, it benefits all of us, I think, if new features can standardize so that the true value of the F, which is standardized format that all the people agree on must maintain. So if every vendor or every project has their own extensions at some stage, the amount of changes that people cannot be interlocked with so much, at least like any of these will be. And last but not least, maintenance work on end-to-round showing the system version. So there are back reports against 1.1, 1.2 and also the other versions of that. So those got fixed, and also got fixed as well and also visible to see as we are. Great, so that was what actually happened. Why I'm here is partially because since quite a while nothing really substantial happened in terms of the methods which was getting the standard out. So there was some concrete action finally and I really like to highlight your name which is Regina Henshel who is for TDF, the document foundation part of the UDFTC so she's purely volunteer she's a teacher in real life and she comes every week and attends the UDFTC course and does great work there find spots and and of course some things to find spots and spots in the new office but in the new office it's not that compliant if you need to fix this new office or if you propose to change the standards if you have the sentiment that the standard matches the new office is doing and she approached the document foundation with the proposal to put that proposal to fund somebody to write or to edit the new UDF version and TDF forecasts are clear and after lots of deliberation and lots of planning for looking in the pockets for some money of the TDF we finally this year we need funding and so the plan was to just have some kill start like some 10k or something just to get off the notepad plus some matching funds so that for every other company that should advance TDF will match that to a sort of limit and that rent didn't go badly so it actually went as well as Microsoft to step up to play so yes, we will fund that we will fund that TDF all of this is the right on the software, CIC the charity, the UDF fund my son I think Andrew is part of that so essentially TDF said okay this is the money we will find the companies to fund that and then find some editorial contract about all of that happened so Francis Cave is tasked to edit the new UDF version and SC34 Shell which is on the ISO level the group that is now receiving the Margo Asus TC the UASUS standard and then moves that into Margo Asus standard level just international requirements so Francis Cave is the Shell person who then will eventually receive some sort of funding so I think that's pretty good idea and this is a great standard professional and it's partnering with Patrick Rousseau who is the current Shell that we have to see of working as we speak working on the Margo Asus update updated draft that all kind of originally kicked us all into action so it was crumbling people were probably in agreement part of the agreement that this is a sustainable sustainable situation she kicked us into action and ultimately managed to get us into more rolling again including the TC freezing 103 submissions on June 1st so you say well this is good for deadline and we issue everything after that date it will not be considered 103 anymore so that after that the editors can start working on the standard we're not considering having to have to change things and it was really focusing people on the three-year relationship probably if you look into that the one with the bed one if there's anybody here at the spoon who is using working for a corporation that is using FUNIA or that is selling products based on FUNIA please do consider funding so there's still a little bit of budget left from this matching budget that's TDF it would be a shame to let that lapse because it's no amount just to step up to the place, talk to me we'll talk to Simon and we will work about how to do that so we have funding secured but we are at least able to push that towards the end of the year hopefully with the first committee draft but we have not secured funding beyond that yet sharing that then through the standardization process and bureaucracy perhaps editing further accepting crimes that is not a secure bet so please or ask friends and family or if you have other companies that might please do approach I think it's a good idea can we look into some ideas do you think that's going to happen I need to go mention that already so EOF marketing also took a dip and it was marching at the moment and there's some work underway do we know that we have adoption TC in some form but that's exactly that so so the goal for that is to coordinate marketing around ODF ramping up but then sometime next year hopefully we will have marketing in place and we will get the work out for that so a quick walkthrough in the development of the project is also a very nice initiative I think not really but it's not anymore so he started a couple of years ago it's really not a good idea but for something like this there are lots and lots and lots of changes coming in the day that ODF compliance can bring up any type that's a patch that's another patch patches all together lead to the problem that suddenly develops in the ODF and that only gets caught a year later when the version is shipped and somebody is running through an elevator but that's really not how it should be so what you really need for the development is that it's available so what the medium should have so ideally you want it has to break so that the doc doesn't even leave your disk or if it doesn't leave your disk it goes to the guard the continuous integration should fail there so he started to set up some things running some data on some of the results we need a version of it for some re-tests and he's really like that idea and so tender that CME my company started implementing in late 2016 and that the goal for that is that validation is the default and the thing that entry tests entry codes is writing in the liberal disability environment is tested for validity most importantly of course for the effort also for the same for OSM for universal rights and for for the effort so you know that we have a similar from the space for OSM for the time performance it's a bit more important for you to do some fine and you're able to do that to run but always the hardest is to train as much as you can as much as you can and so again the goal was that every developer that was up to need anything extra should get that and so again it's not happening and it's something that will be up and so it's more error reporting so that should point to a great place and it's a line and the pointer to the line like this place this is developed so that you actually see and also to be able to do a second art so that whenever needs to be discovered that a problem appeared earlier but it didn't catch that that you should be able to do a second art in a very commitment program and another is that it should increase the likelihood that you see when you see a submission that discusses the crisis to keep updated versions of the schema and the trees so that you do have a potential file format that's a new feature that you need to adjust and realize a new schema and in fact part of the path you can just directly go to to see inside of care like you propose the systems and that's indeed a problem so you just check it out and how it's generally made and feel at risk of cracks nothing else there's also a crash testing machine which is a much larger scope of documents a much larger part of documents that's run so it's running for almost a week and it's importing them to the labor so this other community office will get the weekly crash test updates and that has a column for for mobility problems and that's enough for all of us that is not down to zero so there's only one way to work there that's also something that brings the wheels but it potentially drags the world if somebody adds a unit test touches a feature that is not yet written anywhere but it's one of the web docs that are run on the crash testing machine and you will suddenly see that so that's one of the very obvious easy hacks it's potentially also something like a key soft project or DCI project to go through all of the in the community that was okay so that's all I wanted to say just a quick upload click on all of the brand of salt click that with the brand of salt this is well it was the June 20th at 18.00 and you can check out the brand of salt everything else that's called a planned route path whether that works out in standardization that is even less so in software development always gets the idea so before 6.2 which was due in February the plan is towards the plan is towards the end of the year to have the first quantity draft so there's no situation as it certainly means the last one but that should be the first draft that you come up to and we get lots of reviews and we are too involved in looking into that I don't know about something as I mentioned there's something in the marketing ground where we have running up and running up to them and hopefully we have something standardized by OASIS maybe in the so the the review can be much faster there's a 30 30 day minimum review for the voting period for new standards but whenever somebody finds a problem that sends you back at the variable also that it's easy but it's like three times more times that then you need to fix the things so hopefully until this we we have something out and meanwhile as you see like the people at Regina, and Patrick and Andreas we move on and we're working on the next which is probably either one of four or two of zero depending on how things are going that's far out still leaves the problem of how to possibly fund editing work for that so we will probably have to meet each other next year and ask again if you are somehow willing to fund or help funding of the editorial but I think the important that the forum is important enough and the idea behind the truly standard of support is that we will collectively find enough funding to keep that going and simply because it will be sharing a number of forums but to the fact that so much work goes into actual GC where all the stuff has been happening for the past seven and seven eight years we have been able to erase that that's the standard of more than 350 issues in many halls of standardization of all the standards we're working on it's like it's like writing something that would not be easy so the hope is that if this is successfully running we can make many more of those funding grounds and people will be able to try Thanks for your attention and I think that's the only number to have questions This is one of the ones that will be opportunity to release the current version of the forum is very, even very much do we have now a chance to read that about the forum? Yeah, there's another third question I think that we will be able to hear from the members of the forum but also from an accident in 2006 we still see that the members of the generics bad for the function so anyone who can see mentioned that let's see I have a question what was the what happened because so far we didn't have any problem So that's one of the questions so so we're going to leave the office okay let me try to so there's two questions I only have one of these and that's not better but the last question it's it's also perhaps a strategy or a client management for the office that depending on how things are going I would at least move out at the development side we might want to start writing out the new one of three once the first committee draft is out so also believe with the work started for 6-3 to run for 6-2 or 7-1 I think in January so start starting December or January next year we could feel this time changing all the LX namespaces to proper office namespaces but that has quite some work to do you can't just say okay I'm just writing out the new stuff and when somebody on document comes they can read it once so if you're stating something from the all the standard namespaces to the new ones so there's some work to do but it's pretty so that's easy to crowd source so that's easy to do that once for one of the I am it's not easy to do that I think it's high for 100-200 more so but it's so robust yeah do you have any idea of the proportion of the extended things that we run this last day to 1-2, how much of those are going to 1-3 so you just have to remove them from 1-2 as standard I don't think that she's always one of the namespaces so the thing is that you can check that you look into the check out of the data repository you look into the schema sub directory and that's the difference 1-3 schema sub directory and just just that 1-2 that's the number of changes that's one of the the nice features of this validation not exactly but some nice 9% of the variables that we're writing today and it's already in the schema so you can just see the difference