Hello Charles (et al), 2011/1/3 Charles-H. Schulz <[email protected]>: > Barbara, > > Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:55:21 -0600, > Barbara Duprey <[email protected]> a écrit : > >> On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote: >> > Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto: >> > [...]
> Well, the problem is that it's not that documented. Really, > Transitional OOXML was an honourable way out for MS at the ISO's JTC 1. > > Basically the deal was that the strict OOXML was rumoured to be clean > (although I don't think it is and I'm not the only one) while the > transitional was "offering more features" and was more in line with the > existing and used formats used by MS Office 2007 and 2010. At this > stage we have no evidence that the transitional OOXML and the formats > used in MS office suites match, and I'm not even saying this out of bad > will against MS: it's a really important question. As one of those actually trying to maintain OOXML in ISO, your discussions are really interesting to me. As per your discussions around S vs T, there are a couple of points I'd like to make. 1. About conformance to OOXML (S or T): Leif mentioned that implementing OOXML would display Microsoft's dirty laundry. I am looking very much forward to your findings and where Microsoft Office does not comply with the conformance rules in OOXML. I hope you will share these with us - and the world in general, and any test documents generated by Microsoft Office you make during your implementation would be extremely interesting to look at. 2. T vs S: Please bear in mind that S is basically a limited version of T. The only major obstacle/difference is that alle the namespaces of S are different than those of T. Also, Microsoft Office uses these namespaces during import as some sort of white-list, and AFAIK the new namespaces of S have not yet been added to this whitelist (since the addition of them is relatively recent and was after launch of Microsoft Office 2010). Basically, if Microsoft Office doesn't recognize the new namespaces, the docs will all fail on import in Microsoft Office and you'd have zero interop. Finally I ancourage you to make a public place to put your findings while implementing OOXML in LibreOffice. It could serve as a very usefull reference for a lot of people - including people like Leif lobbying our politicians to use/mandate usage ODF. PS: when trying to do interop with e.g. Microsoft Office always consult their implementer notes available at http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ee908652(v=office.12).aspx If any of you need additional information, I'd be happy to help. PPS: for those of you on this list actually implementing OOXML in LibreOffice - are you considering implementing MCE (OOXML, Part 3) fully in LibreOffice? -- Jesper Lund Stocholm www.idippedut.dk SC34/WG4 http://www.itscj.ipsj.or.jp/sc34/wg4/ -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected] Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
