On 23/02/2014, Alexander Wilms f.alexander.wi...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi everyone,
I already posted this on the LibreOffice Google+ and Facebook pages, but
there are probably quite a few people subscibed to this list who are not
following either one.
Despite the self-generated hype, not every
On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 01:12:25 +0100, Alexander Wilms wrote
If you think that truly open standards are a better solution than
OOXML, then it'd be beneficial if you registered on the
standards.data.gov.uk page and commented. In 3 days, comments will
be closed.
Maybe i'm not going to make
Stephan Weinberger wrote:
Maybe i'm not going to make friends, but OOXML strict actually *is* an open
standard. The real problem is, that MS-Office until 2013 was not capable of
creating strict files, but wrote OOXML transitional instead (which may -
and as a matter of fact always did -
Hi :)
The strict vs transitional issue really doesn't bode well for future
implementations of the OOXML format.
Who would there be to notice when MS's implementation again deviates
from strict? Is anyone or any organisation sufficiently well-versed
in the immensely wordy ISO standard for OOXML
Hi everyone,
I already posted this on the LibreOffice Google+ and Facebook pages, but
there are probably quite a few people subscibed to this list who are not
following either one.
The UK government plans to move to open standards like ODF and HTML and
apparently Microsoft didn't know that
