On Jul 16, 2006, at 5:38 AM, David Wilson wrote:
I read through the exchange and I think you put your position very
well and
the response was rather defensively or evasive.
I think it's worth paying close attention to what they've done not just
for interoperability's sake, but also because they seem to have very
similar design goals, as well as constraints. To quote Jennifer:
Please keep in mind that this is a v1 feature, and our first goal was
to make the tools extremely useful for high school and college
students. We designed this feature to be a platform so that anyone –
us, in later versions; any 3rd party like EndNote; or you(!) could
build tools on top of ours. That’s why everything in this feature is
XML-based. Certainly there are more things we could have delivered
with more time and person-power, but we tried first to make sure our
platform was solid.
And I think with some caveats, they will have met these goals. I am
particularly intrigued by their no-local-database approach, where the
editing forms are only editing XML data embedded in the file package.
This is something we need to seriously consider for OOo (though we can
do a better job).
Bruce
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
