Rick Barnes wrote: > I understand the concept of a computer program, and the framework > organization of OOo. However, calling something a program merely > suggests that it is a set of instructions which can be carried out by a > computer. These are computer programs, true they need the rest of the > framework of OOo to run, but so do many applications (which are called > programs).
No, it's more than just a framework. Writer (for example) is not an executable. It is just one facet that OOo can take. Consider this example. Firefox has "themes" (Classic, Modern, etc). Would you say that "Classic" is a program? > I find the use of the term "component", while accurate with reference to > OOo, to be "clumsy". I certainly don't advocate the term "component" for chapter titles. I think we should try to find a way to avoid giving those... things... a name, if it can be managed. Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org |
