Hi,
if there were an interest in standardizing a macro API for office
applications, I would be much in favor. But I wouldn't want to
standardize the current API. It's unnecessarily complicated and takes
a sizeable amount of time to learn, even for a seasoned programmer.
I'd rather create something new and modern.

Greetings

eymux

On Wed, Jul 13, 2011 at 12:21 PM, RA Stehmann
<[email protected]> wrote:
> Olivier Hallot schrieb:
>>
>>
>> Em 13-07-2011 05:33, RA Stehmann escreveu:
>>> Uwe Altmann schrieb:
>>>> Hi
>>>>
>>>> Am 12.07.11 20:38, schrieb drew:
>>>>> hmmm - that is assuming that the two separate projects will maintain
>>>>> enough common code base that shared extensions are possible - that is a
>>>>> requirement that I for one would not want to see enforced. The fact
>>>>> that
>>>>> we can share extensions today is, IMO, a remnant of a past history and
>>>>> should not dictate decisions for going forward - so I would not be in
>>>>> favor our hosting Apache OpenOffice.org branded extensions on a
>>>>> TDF/LibreOffice service, nor would I be in favor or seeing
>>>>> TDF/Libreoffice continue to point back to Apache OpenOffice.org for any
>>>>> future end user services.
>>>> As in past some extensions required some special version of OOo, in
>>>> future they may require a special version of LO or only LO or only AOOo
>>>> at all. It's more testing but surely can be documented and handeled.
>>>> Besides that I dont't expect LO to refurbish the API on a
>>>> down-to-the-foundation level in the next years.
>>> There is a solution for that Problem: standardization of the API for
>>> example under the roof of OASIS.
>>>
>>> That doesn't necessarily mean, LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org will have
>>> the same API but a practical common set.
>>>
>>> Extensions could notice, whether they use only (parts of) the standard
>>> set.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Michael
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> Isn't this going to put the API into a cast? (for the good and for the bad)
>> Regards
>>
> No, it isn't. You can improve standards (like ODF). LibreOffice for
> example could develop new API elements especially for new features,
> which could be intergrated in a later version of the API standard.
>
> The standard should be only a practical set, supported by LibreOffice,
> OpenOffice.org and others. But that doesn't mean the standard describes
> the whole API of one of these products but only a great part. So there
> is room for improvement.
>
> Regards
> Michael
>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [email protected]
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

Reply via email to