On 01/02/2011 09:08 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote: --- SNIP --- >
> Is that what you think it would be to implement the OOXML "Strict" > formats? I sure don't see it that way -- we would simply be supporting > an ISO standard, however it was arrived at. The fact that we could > possibly do it before MS does is not "doing to others as they do to you" > IMNSHO. I just think it would be great if LibO became the reference > implementation! > I don't think LO could implement the writing of OOXML in ANY format that would be compatible to MS. And to try to do so would simply imply that LO was broken (in MS's words, anyway). > >> By being able to read .doc and .docx formats LO demonstrates it's >> willingness to at least reach out to MS and its customers. Therefore, >> LO ends up being the good guy. >> >> Craig >> Tyche > > Right. That's why I think it's a good move to read them. The issue is > about writing the Transitional formats. Do you think we have to do that > to claim the moral high ground? > I don't feel that writing any of the OOXML formats would claim the moral high ground. I think writing OOXML would be like trying to hit a 10 inch randomly moving target from an aircraft at 10,000 feet moving in the opposite direction. First, you gotta get close and limit its possible movements. Right now, that's just not possible. Look how long it took to come up with a reasonably compatible version of doc to write. Nope, writing back as doc is good enough at this point. > ---- SNIP ---- Craig Tyche -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
