I did look around some more. The page in question is only listed from the sidebar of the "why" section, under "More Reasons," <http://www.openoffice.org/why/>. I think that is a far stretch from reasons AOO is valuable to use and I remain concerned about that (and whatever all of the localizations say).
The Office 2013 end-of-life statement is now dated, April 2014 now being behind us. That page suggests an opportunity, that's fine. It talks about migration, and that's important. It's a good place to link to something about what questions to have answered in having migration work; that doesn't have to be there. There are some places on the New Computers and on the ODF page that could be updated and I do worry about giving the impression that interoperability is seamless in what is not said. Those matters are different than the concerns that arise over "Compliant Costs." -----Original Message----- From: Dennis E. Hamilton [mailto:orc...@apache.org] Sent: Thursday, January 29, 2015 10:20 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: [DISCUSS] Inappropriate "Compliance Costs" I didn't even know about this page, <http://www.openoffice.org/why/why_compliance.html>, until I saw an update on the Apache ooo-site SVN yesterday. I glanced at it and didn't think much about it. Today, Simon Phipps has pointed out how strange that page is. I agree. If you stand back and look at the question from the perspective of someone interested in adopting Apache OpenOffice in use, this page is not helpful. Something, if anything, more straightforward and pertinent is called for, based on what it is within our power to provide. I am grateful to Simon for pointing out how over-reaching this page is. [ ... ] --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
