https://bz.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=3959
--- Comment #326 from Keith Collyer <[email protected]> --- (In reply to ther from comment #322) [snip] > Users don't have to care whether their phone is unix based or not. It's a > fact: numerically at least, more people in the real world will have their > first experience of a computer machine via a non-m$ android based device. This is completely irrelevant. You mentioned Unix as an example of that philosophy (small, single-purpose programs), then claimed that people are used to it because ... Android! This is a shame, as your last set of responses were quite reasoned, now you have gone back to troll-mode. > If > a child somewhere in the world first uses to write a document using an > "office" (ironic, no offices to be seen!!!) program, that program should > preferable be open source. Whatever its source, it needs to provide the features needed. > > Right, so help to specify and create an outliner that is better than Word. I > > already gave a couple of examples in the requirements I added. Having used > > both tools extensively, it is difficult to think of a feature that I have > > used where one is significantly better than the other - except for > > outlining. So the long-term strategy isn't working - yet. > > > > It would be better to develop the long-term strategy of a superior function. That's not "better", it's exactly what I said > The m$-clone fans assume everyone has access to and is able to use m$word > and simply copy the functionality into lo/oo. You're at it again with the childish "m$" nonsense. If you want to be treated like an adult, act like one. If you are insulting me, you've missed the mark. I'm not asking for copying what Word has, the requirements I have outlined include things that Word does not do. Or did you not read that because it would cause cognitive dissonance? > > It's apparent that this function requires signficant work, requiring > professional project management and user specification. It's very strange > that authors with supposedly superior communication skills are unable to > collaborative and produce a definitive specification of _superior_ functions > for programmers to develop. We have this ancient request and an equivalent > in LO. Which program should this function be written for, first? Don't care whether it is LO or OO. I would use whichever it appeared in. I've made a start on the requirements. OK I did it in the LO Wiki because there is no place I could find to do the same for OO. My requirements aren't perfect, they are very high level. But they are a start. > It's equally strange that noone is willing to fund such work. Even if apache > does not accept donations, why can't symbolic donations be collated for > another organisation, FSF or LO, etc.? Totally irrelevant. -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the issue. You are the assignee for the issue.
