> -----Original Message----- > From: Rory O'Farrell [mailto:ofarr...@iol.ie] > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 10:42 AM > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > Subject: Re: AOO Product page - ambiguous wording? > > On Sun, 24 May 2020 10:30:58 +0200 > Jörg Schmidt <joe...@j-m-schmidt.de> wrote: > > > > -----Original Message----- > > > From: Rory O'Farrell [mailto:ofarr...@iol.ie] > > > Sent: Sunday, May 24, 2020 9:20 AM > > > To: dev@openoffice.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: AOO Product page - ambiguous wording? > > > > > > On Sat, 23 May 2020 22:34:03 +0200 > > > Czesław Wolański <czeslaw.wolan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > > > Hi, > > > > > > > > Apache OpenOffice Product Description, section "Why Apache > > > OpenOffice?" > > > > > > > > > https://www.openoffice.org/product/index.html#why-apache-openoffice > > > > > > > > Not being a native English speaker I have some doubts about > > > one part (2nd > > > > bulleted list, 2nd item): > > > > > > > > "It's easy to change to Apache OpenOffice - the software > > > reads all major > > > > competitors' files" > > > > > > > > From a purely linguistic perspective: is wording "reads > all major > > > > competitors' files" to be understood as: > > > > > > > > - it reads all files of major competitors > > > > OR > > > > - it reads files of all major competitors > > > > > > > > > > > > Best regards, > > > > > > > > Czesław Wolański > > > > > > Best to rephrase: reads most file types of major competitors. > > > > > > I say "most" to allow for occasional inabilities to read some > > > .docx and perhaps others not yet developed. > > > > They are developed. The filters for these formats are ready > for integration into AOO, but they only have to be integrated. > > > > The fact that this important work has not been done for > years is simply a disaster, because it forces more and more > users to turn away from AOO. > > > > > > grretings, > > Jörg > > There have been (on Forum) some small number of .nnnx files > that AOO could not read. Rather than make an absolute > statement "All files", I prefer that one should say "most > files", to cater for the odd "rogue" file that for some > reason will not read.
Yes, I did not object to _this_ formulation at all, but only to the claim that there is still much to be developed regarding the reading of the formats. *But I see my mistake, it was about "read format" and not also about write format.* So: I was wrong. I just think practical requirements must count here and as I have been involved with OO professionally for over 12 years, I can only conclude that one of the main reasons for professional users to use AOO today is that AOO cannot store the OOXML formats. It's not that I think it would be good to use OOXML (I mean instead of ODF), it's just that users need this feature. greetings, Jörg --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
