On Jun 14, 2006, at 2:49 AM, David Wilson wrote:
y University's IT department distributes
OpenOffce for free, but the Academic departments recommend students use
Endnotes for bibliographic management.
Minor correction: Endnote, not Endnotes.
Until recently OpenOffice could claim to at least have bibliographic
some
support whilst MS Word did not have any. The situation is now
reversed. Word
2007 has significantly better bibliographic support than OpenOffice.
Strongly underline this point.
Given this situation I propose that a fifth dot point be added to this
list-
[...]
In terms of the higher Education market bibliographic support is not
'feature', it is a strategic requirement. If we do not have it we are
not in
it.
I have to say, I've about lost all faith in OOo. The community (ahem,
let's be specific: Sun) seems really not to understand or care about
what we are trying to do, and even the generic requirements we have to
make it technically easier for developers to implement seems not to be
a priority. Even worse, I have no sense of a community process that
actually sets these priorities.
The reality is Word is a better word processor than Writer, it is used
by 99% of the people in my field (I have literally never heard of
anyone who uses OpenOffice, but simply assume there are one or two out
there), and it will now have really good built-in citation support. So
why would even I or anyone else in higher ed bother with OOo?
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
