On 01/02/2011 11:35 AM, Charles Marcus wrote: > On 2011-01-02 12:20 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote: >> 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). > > What are you talking about? As has been pointed out numerous times, LibO > *already* *does* write OOXML. > > I'm glad you're not the decision maker... > Does it? And to what degree of compatibility? Also, this was code that was brought in from GO-OO which, as you may be aware, was developed by Novell UNDER CONTRACT TO MS. No, I'm not hollering FLOSS, here. I'm trying to get you to understand that there are copyright and patent issues here that could embroil LO in legal battles that it really doesn't need.
Craig Tyche -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
