https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=149018
--- Comment #6 from Mike Kaganski <mikekagan...@hotmail.com> --- (In reply to sdc.blanco from comment #5) I like the direction very much! However, the OLE wrong term has one advantage. The "embedded objects" (using the proposal terminology) may be both linked or embedded. So while distinguishing the embedded objects from MS OLE technology, it introduces another confusion: is it consistent to call a linked object "embedded"? I realize that I myself raised the topic of "OLE is not OLE", but I must confess that I myself don't have a specific proposal how to solve that. Likely the OLE term was chosen by ex-SUN back then because of the same terminology difficulties ... -- You are receiving this mail because: You are on the CC list for the bug.
