Re: [tdf-discuss] [Hackfest] Ohio Linux Fest

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Jun 24, 2011 at 7:13 AM, drew  wrote:
> On Thu, 2011-06-23 at 15:36 -0400, drew wrote:
>> Just a quick note.
>>
>> Have sent off the formal request to the OHLF organizers..will keep folks
>> posted as specifics firm up.
>>
>
> Hi,
>
> Quick note.
>
> Exchanged a few emails with one of the other organizers of the show.
>
> No final yes - but looks good.
>
> One slight change is looking likely - moving this from Friday the 9th to
> Saturday the 10th.
>
> I think that would be a plus.
>
> //drew
>

I agree that the 10th would be better. I am not familiar with OHLF
attendance, but Saturday at LFNW is by far the big day. There have
been some Friday events, but they are not so well attended.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Hackfest - September 9th, Ohio Linux Fest

[Carl Symons]

Sounds like a good idea if there are enough people to assist with
pulling it off.

What is hands-on training? Training on how to use LibO apps? Or is it
more in line with a hacking session?

What is being certified?

Carl

On Wed, Jun 15, 2011 at 1:13 PM, drew  wrote:
> Howdy,
>
> Had a chance to speak with one of the organizers for the Ohio Linux fest
> (Columbus, Ohio, USA) regarding the possibility of holding a LibreOffice
> hackfest/QA session.
>
> They are quite interested and motivated to help us do this.
>
> The date would be Friday September 9th, this day is mostly used at this
> event for hand-on training and certification testing.
>
> As this point the show organizers are waiting to here from us regarding
> our interest in putting this together.
>
> Before pursuing this with them and either waisting everyones time or
> setting up one big FAIL I would like to see if there is interest from
> other community members, particularly developers, willing to help.
>
> Let me know - sooner is much better then later on this.
>
> Thanks very much,
>
> Drew Jensen
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> 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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Oracle contributes OOo Code to Apache Software Foundation'sIncubator

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Jun 3, 2011 at 3:25 AM, Augustine Souza  wrote:
> On 6/3/11, Harold Fuchs  wrote:
> ...
>> The LO folk left the OOo group because OOo was, in their opinion, going to
>> be over-controlled (by Oracle). Now that this is no longer true, the LO folk
>> don't have a case and should return to the fold. ...
>
> Nonsense.
>
>>
>> Oh, and by the way, get rid of the asinine name "LibreOffice" which half the
>> world can't pronounce and which three quarters of the world doesn't
>> understand the meaning of.
>>
>
> More nonsense.
>

>
Augustine Souza...+1

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Apr 29, 2011 at 9:42 AM, Marc Paré  wrote:


snip

>
> Thanks for the answer. So, we should then go with the blurb without the "and
> can be found by searching online" part.
>
> Here it is:
>
> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run by
> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are mature
> and heavily trafficked and offer quality support to LibreOffice. LibreOffice
> does not offer an official forums board at this time. An official forums
> board is still under consideration."
>
> I'll post this blurb on the website list and ask that the "Forums" section
> be updated to this new blurb.
>
> Cheers
>
> Marc
>

I like this Marc. Thank you for pulling it together.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:34 AM, Augustine Souza  wrote:
> Microsoft must be smiling.
>

Yeah, it must be amusing for them to see a community of people working
out their own problems. If they'd buy our crap, they wouldn't have to
worry about such things as forums.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 9:50 AM, Marc Paré  wrote:
> Hi Carl
>
> Le 28/04/11 11:22 AM, Carl Symons a écrit :
>>>
>>> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run
>>> by
>>> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are
>>> more
>>> mature and heavily trafficked and offer quality support to the
>>> LibreOffice
>>> project. LibreOffice does not offer an official forums board at this
>>> time.
>>> An official forums board is still under consideration."
>>>
>>> Does this sound more informative?
>>>
>>> Cheers
>>>
>>> Marc
>>>
>>
>> Yes, now only one issue... "more mature" is comparative, but there is
>> no comparison present. (Well, one is implied.) I'd change this
>> sentence to:
>> These forums are mature and heavily trafficked. They offer quality
>> support for LibreOffice, and can be found by searching online.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>
> So this newer version:
>
> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run by
> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are mature
> and heavily trafficked. They offer quality support to LibreOffice and can be
> found by searching online. LibreOffice does not offer an official forums
> board at this time. An official forums board is still under consideration."
>
> I am not quite sure what is the significance of the "and can be found by
> searching online". Remember, the reader is already on the LibreOffice
> website page "getting help" page.[1] I am not sure if it needs this part of
> the sentence as it is ambiguous.
>
> Cheers
>
> Marc
>

I'm fine if it's not there. Overly obsessive, but I'll work on getting
over it B^)

Carl

> [1] http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> 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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 8:14 AM, Marc Paré  wrote:
> Le 28/04/11 10:47 AM, Carl Symons a écrit :
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Marc Paré  wrote:
>>>
>>> Le 28/04/11 09:04 AM, Carl Symons a écrit :
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Harold Fuchs
>>>>     wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> Please, why does the LibreOffice web page link to the forums for
>>>>> OpenOffice.org ?
>>>>>
>>>>> The current LO Help web page at http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/
>>>>> has
>>>>> two
>>>>> links to OOo forums:
>>>>> - http://www.oooforum.org/
>>>>> - http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/
>>>>>
>>>>> Harold Fuchs
>>>>> London, England
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Because they are a useful resource for getting LibreOffice help, as
>>>> LibreOffice and OpenOffice closely resemble each other.
>>>>
>>>> There are millions of people using OpenOffice. There are fewer
>>>> millions (so far) using LibreOffice. The OOo forums are more mature
>>>> and more heavily trafficked than the LibreOffice forums.
>>>>
>>>
>>> As the "forums" discussions are/have been/will be controversial, could we
>>> add a more informative comment on the web page/forums section. Something
>>> such Carl has just mentioned. Perhaps something like:
>>>
>>> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run
>>> by
>>> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are
>>> more
>>> mature and heavily trafficked and offer quality support to the
>>> LibreOffice
>>> project. LibreOffice does not offer a native forums board at this time. A
>>> native forums board is still under consideration."
>>>
>>
>> I agree Marc.
>>
>>> I'm not sure that the average user will get the meaning of "native
>>
>> forums board". Maybe "official forum" or "forum sponsored by
>> LibreOffice itself".
>>
>> "Still under consideration" may be technically accurate. I think that
>> it would be understandable and land better with users to say something
>> like "implementation details are still being discussed by the LibO
>> community".
>>
>
> I am just keeping out of any comment on the state of forums right now. It is
> just too explosive an issue.
>
> So, incorporating your suggestions, the text would read:
>
> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run by
> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are more
> mature and heavily trafficked and offer quality support to the LibreOffice
> project. LibreOffice does not offer an official forums board at this time.
> An official forums board is still under consideration."
>
> Does this sound more informative?
>
> Cheers
>
> Marc
>

Yes, now only one issue... "more mature" is comparative, but there is
no comparison present. (Well, one is implied.) I'd change this
sentence to:
These forums are mature and heavily trafficked. They offer quality
support for LibreOffice, and can be found by searching online.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 7:28 AM, Marc Paré  wrote:
> Le 28/04/11 09:04 AM, Carl Symons a écrit :
>>
>> On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Harold Fuchs
>>   wrote:
>>>
>>> Please, why does the LibreOffice web page link to the forums for
>>> OpenOffice.org ?
>>>
>>> The current LO Help web page at http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ has
>>> two
>>> links to OOo forums:
>>> - http://www.oooforum.org/
>>> - http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/
>>>
>>> Harold Fuchs
>>> London, England
>>>
>>
>>
>> Because they are a useful resource for getting LibreOffice help, as
>> LibreOffice and OpenOffice closely resemble each other.
>>
>> There are millions of people using OpenOffice. There are fewer
>> millions (so far) using LibreOffice. The OOo forums are more mature
>> and more heavily trafficked than the LibreOffice forums.
>>
>
> As the "forums" discussions are/have been/will be controversial, could we
> add a more informative comment on the web page/forums section. Something
> such Carl has just mentioned. Perhaps something like:
>
> "You can get support for LibreOffice from various independent forums run by
> LibreOffice and OpenOffice.org users and supporters. These forums are more
> mature and heavily trafficked and offer quality support to the LibreOffice
> project. LibreOffice does not offer a native forums board at this time. A
> native forums board is still under consideration."
>

I agree Marc.

I can't see into the future, but it is easy to imagine that there will
be an active LibreOffice forum sometime. Easy to imagine that The
Document Foundation would host it, sans ads. And that it will be the
GoTo LibO forum. This will be the case increasingly as OpenOffice
deteriorates (easy to imagine that too, IMO).

I'm not sure that the average user will get the meaning of "native
forums board". Maybe "official forum" or "forum sponsored by
LibreOffice itself".

"Still under consideration" may be technically accurate. I think that
it would be understandable and land better with users to say something
like "implementation details are still being discussed by the LibO
community".

I don't want to offend anyone's delicate sensibilities, but the forum
I use for LibO questions is Google Search. Search for "openoffice
forums" or "libreoffice forums", get more than a million results.
Thus, I think that it would be effective to add something to Marc's
write-up suggesting online search for solutions using either
LibreOffice or OpenOffice as a qualifier.

Carl

> This way, the user, seeking help on this page, will be informed of the
> outside links, informed of their solid performance in helping LO users,
> informed that there is no native forums at this point and informed that a
> forums board is still under consideration.
>
> Although quite verbose, it would inform users of the situation at this point
> and slow down the constant new threads about creating a native forums board.
>
> It is very clear that the forums topic is a recurring topic and that it will
> most likely never disappear until a native forums board is created OR until
> one/more of the external board adopt a name change that is more inclusive of
> the LibreOffice name.
>
> Cheers
>
> Marc
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> 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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Forums - A Different Question

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Apr 28, 2011 at 2:52 AM, Harold Fuchs
 wrote:
> Please, why does the LibreOffice web page link to the forums for
> OpenOffice.org ?
>
> The current LO Help web page at http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/ has two
> links to OOo forums:
> - http://www.oooforum.org/
> - http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/
>
> Harold Fuchs
> London, England
>


Because they are a useful resource for getting LibreOffice help, as
LibreOffice and OpenOffice closely resemble each other.

There are millions of people using OpenOffice. There are fewer
millions (so far) using LibreOffice. The OOo forums are more mature
and more heavily trafficked than the LibreOffice forums.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request for Libre Office on Spoon

[Carl Symons]

I didn't get too deep into Spoon, but it looks a good resource for
LibreOffice users. Not that much different conceptually from Mozilla
offerings.

Carl

On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 9:16 AM, Blake Madden  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> I was referred to this mailing list by Florian Effenberger of The Document 
> Foundation. My name is Blake and I work for a company called Spoon, which 
> offers the ability to launch desktop apps from the web with no installs.
>
> We recently received a request to add LibreOffice to the Spoon.net app 
> library.  We'd like to partner with The Document Foundation to offer 
> LibreOffice on Spoon.  In the interest of transparency and public input, 
> Florian suggested I submit my request to this mailing list for discussion.
>
> You can see examples of Spoon powered apps at http://spoon.net/apps  . For 
> free apps and trials, Spoon is a free service, and all that is needed for 
> distribution is written permission.
>
> Feel free to shoot me an email if you have any questions.  Thanks for your 
> time.
>
> Sincerely,
>
> Blake Madden
> Account Manager
> Spoon
>
>
> [Play-At-Spoon-On-White-Small]
>
> Connect your desktops to the cloud
> Web: spoon.net
> Latest apps @spoonapps and games 
> @spoongames
>
> US: 877-223-3551 x1005
> Int'l: 206-774-8769
> Fax: 206-388-3110
> 1000 Dexter Avenue, 5th Floor
> Seattle, Washington 98109
>
>
>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> 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 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Forums... again

[Carl Symons]

On Sun, Apr 17, 2011 at 6:06 AM, RGB ES  wrote:
> 2011/4/17 Christian Lohmaier :
>> Again: The point is not forum or not. The point is: Why the heck do
>> you want *yet another* forum.
>>
> Please, re read my message: I'm NOT talking about a new forum nor to
> split anything. I'm talking about OFFICIAL COOPERATION: about not to
> let the forum issue as a second class citizen on LibO ecosystem.
> Which kind of cooperation? I don't know, that needs to be discussed.
> By telling people "use existing resources" YOU are splitting the
> community: the official community that talks through the the official
> mailing lists and the "other community" that use "external channels".
>
> --

What does "official cooperation" mean?

How does a website gain official recognition? Who monitors to see if
it's a forum or a knockoff?

Why not just say on the official LibreOffice websites that forums can
be found by searching for "LibreOffice forum"?

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
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

Re: [tdf-discuss] Support for Office 2003 file formats (WordML, SpreadsheetML

[Carl Symons]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:55 AM, Jonathan Aquilina
 wrote:

...

>>>
>> Although MS stopped free support for MS Office 2003 some time ago, its
>> use is still widespread. It would be a mistake for LibO to support the
>> ill-defined, shifting OOXML and deprecate MS 2003 support.
>>
>> Carl
>>
>>
> Carl is it safe to say we could easily depreciate anything prior to 2003,
> but keep support for 2003 2007 and 2010?
>

I'm not competent to address this. I encounter quite a number of
people and businesses that use MS 2003, but older than that...I don't
know.

Adding an additional point here...currently LibO more closely
resembles MS 2003 than 2007 with its ribbon menu doodad. Just last
Thursday, I met with the head of a department who had just started
using 2007. She didn't like it and was considering the possibility of
taking the entire department back to a 2003 standard. LibO wasn't the
thrust of the meeting, but she was quite interested in using it
instead of MS anything.

Carl


>
>>> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 16:36, Peter Jentsch  wrote:
>>>
 Hi,

 I'm currently investigating a bug with the Excel 2003 import filter
 (https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35543). Looking closer at
 the filter and how much work needed to be done to improve it, and
 considering the fact that Office 2003 ML has been superseeded by OOXML,
 fixing that bug feels like flogging a dead horse.

 I'd rather suggest to drop Office 2003 support in LibO altogether and
 instead focus on improving OOXML and HTML import/export.

 For anybody with a large library of Office 2003 XML documents not
 wanting
 to upgrade to MS Office 2007/2010, Microsoft offers a compatibility pack
 that allows to open and save OOXML from MS Office 2003.

 What do you think?

 Peter


 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

>>> --
>>> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
>>> Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
>>> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Support for Office 2003 file formats (WordML, SpreadsheetML

[Carl Symons]

On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Jaime R. Garza  wrote:
> Hi Peter,
>
> I don't really understand the logic behind your suggestion.
>
> You want LO to drop support for the defacto-standard file format???
>
> I don't really see any good reason for doing such a completely strategically
> wrong decision.
>
> Cheers!
>
> Jaime
>

Although MS stopped free support for MS Office 2003 some time ago, its
use is still widespread. It would be a mistake for LibO to support the
ill-defined, shifting OOXML and deprecate MS 2003 support.

Carl


> On Sat, Mar 26, 2011 at 16:36, Peter Jentsch  wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I'm currently investigating a bug with the Excel 2003 import filter
>> (https://bugs.freedesktop.org/show_bug.cgi?id=35543). Looking closer at
>> the filter and how much work needed to be done to improve it, and
>> considering the fact that Office 2003 ML has been superseeded by OOXML,
>> fixing that bug feels like flogging a dead horse.
>>
>> I'd rather suggest to drop Office 2003 support in LibO altogether and
>> instead focus on improving OOXML and HTML import/export.
>>
>> For anybody with a large library of Office 2003 XML documents not wanting
>> to upgrade to MS Office 2007/2010, Microsoft offers a compatibility pack
>> that allows to open and save OOXML from MS Office 2003.
>>
>> What do you think?
>>
>> Peter
>>
>>
>> --
>> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
>> Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
>> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Instant Messenger for Libre Office (serverless and open source)

[Carl Symons]

On Mon, Feb 28, 2011 at 6:24 AM, Italo Vignoli
 wrote:
> On 2/28/11 2:22 PM, Randolph Dohm wrote:
>
>
> P.S. - The fact that our email address is on the public website is not an
> implicit authorization to write. In addition, you have sent a second message
> before getting any answer to the first one. As far as I am concerned, your
> email is blaclisted.
>
> --
> Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation

Blacklisting is sorta harsh. Maybe spank the puppy with a rolled up
newspaper for the first offense.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Default font on LibO

[Carl Symons]

On Sun, Jan 30, 2011 at 8:41 AM, Nguyen Vu Hung  wrote:
> Hello,
>
> This question seems to be trivial and I am sorry if this is a FAQ
>
> What is the default font used by LibO 3.3 on Ubuntu (10.04?)
>
> How can this happen? What could be the reason on the client's side
> that makes the text on LibO's font become squares?
> http://lh3.ggpht.com/_6irjfzkk21k/TULtPvcC91I/Di0/ahD4ZXC_Krc/s800/Selection_128.png

Fonts are set in [menu]Tools>Options...

One reason that fonts become squares is that the default font is not
installed on the computer. It is odd that some menu choices appear
correctly.

>
>
> --
> Best Regards,
> Nguyen Hung Vu [aka: NVH] ( in Vietnamese: Nguyễn Vũ Hưng )
> vuhung16plus{remove}@gmail.dot.com , YIM: vuhung16 , Skype: vuhung16plus
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 2:07 PM, Jason Corfman  wrote:
> I've been reading through this discussion (as much as possible), and there
> is one thing that that I don't understand.
>
> Why do we have so many people complaining about LO writing in the .docx
> format but nobody (that I've seen) is complaining about the .doc format?
> Both are Microsoft formats, but the docx format is a lot closer to being an
> open standard. (Notice, I said it was closer, not that it was, an open
> standard). At least the docx format has some released specifications (as
> inaccurate as they may be), the last I checked, .doc doesn't even have that.

The docx format is a scam in my view (read some of the links in the
original message of this thread for background on that opinion). Until
MS complies fully with the open standards, the only value of docx is
to subvert truly open software. This is a pattern in MS' behavior over
time. I don't like that in the US, computer science in high school
consists of Word and Excel training. But that's the way it is.

That said, I trust in the open community environment of LibreOffice.
The comments and clarifications from Italo Vignoli, Olivier Hallot,
Charles-H. Schulz (apologies if I missed anyone) from The Document
Foundation demonstrate a willingness to listen and guide LibO
development in a reasoned fashion. Even though I don't appreciate the
steps Microsoft took to get their file format approved by the
standards body, the fact is that it is approved (I realize that there
are nuances to that.) The Document Foundation faces a difficult task
bringing an open office suite into being. I was overjoyed to hear
about LibreOffice. It is a bold, risky adventure. It faces major
challenges.

Consequently, I defer to TDF's sensibility about this situation; I'll
support whatever they decide on this issue. The final chapters on
docx/OOXML have not been written. Italo's statement of a philosophy of
FOR is exactly right IMHO.

The fact that this email thread exists, that it allows for all manner
and strength of opinion, is testimony to the strength of open source
software. It also illustrates a guiding principle of TDF.

To The Document Foundation, thank you. Thank you for starting this
project, for listening, for creating LibO in a meritocracy.

Carl Symons

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 3:30 AM, Olivier Hallot
 wrote:



>
>> The Go-oo homepage also says "Going forward, the Go-oo project will be
>> discontinued in favor of LibreOffice." Does that mean that LibreOffice
>> is driven by Novell too?
>>
>
> I wouldn't put in that simple words. Actually, LibreOffice is open to any
> developer, individual or company that whishes to contribute to our code and
> endeavour. On the TDF announcement we invited Oracle to join us and
> suggested them to offer the brand OpenOffice to TDF (later this was politely
> declined by Oracle).
>
> LibreOffice has many contributions of Novell engineers, as well as Oracle
> engineers too. But is is not an Novell product nor TDF is a Novell shop. The
> Next Decade Manifesto says a lot on our purpose and TDF is better described
> in this page:
> http://www.documentfoundation.org/
>
> Please help us not to make the same mistake as OpenOffice.org did.
>
> Kind regards
> --
> Olivier Hallot

Thank you, Olivier.

I clicked on the "list of events" link on
http://www.documentfoundation.org/. There are several events listed
for North America. Would TDF consider being at LinuxFest Northwest in
Bellingham, 4/30 & 5/1? There will be an official call for papers in
early January, but people can register at www.linuxfestnorthwest.org.
LFNW is a true open source expo, free admission, completely run by
volunteers...one of the longest running Fests in the US.

If there are LibOers in the Pacific NW, please contact me off-list if
you'd like to help put together a LibreOffice track. We are looking
for presentations for people who are new to FOSS.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 12:05 PM, Andy Brown  wrote:
> On Fri Dec 31 2010 11:45:46 GMT-0800 (PST)  Carl Symons wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andy Brown 
>> wrote:
>
>>> Yep.  Go back to the first message in this thread and follow the links.
>>>  Very eye opening.
>>>
>>> Andy
>>>
>>
>> You're right, some interesting reading there and on the links.
>>
>> The Go-oo homepage also says "Going forward, the Go-oo project will be
>> discontinued in favor of LibreOffice." Does that mean that LibreOffice
>> is driven by Novell too?
>>
>
> What do you think?
>
> Andy
>

Good question...especially as thinking sometimes gets me in trouble.

Not being privy to the Novell sale goings-on, I don't know how the
Novell/Microsoft arrangement unfolded, how much or what of the
agreements (reported on the Groklaw link, first post) between MS and
Novell are still in place, or who would be bound by them.

Based on what I've read and the actions of people associated with The
Document Foundation, I think that they are operating from true open
source principles. Further, I think that the structures put in place
around LibreOffice support an open source community.

So, pretty much not knowing what I'm talking about, I think that
LibreOffice is a valuable project worth using, supporting, caring
about. I appreciate that the LO founders jumped off into the unknown
with it.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:29 AM, Andy Brown  wrote:
> On Fri Dec 31 2010 11:17:28 GMT-0800 (PST)  Carl Symons wrote:
>>
>> On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Andy Brown 
>> wrote:
>>>
>>> On Fri Dec 31 2010 10:53:16 GMT-0800 (PST)  Paul Gress wrote:
>>>>
>>>> On 12/31/10 07:50 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> The answer to ALL this nonsense is surely this.
>>>>> If you receive an OOXML document, politely reply to the sender and
>>>>> request that they send it in another format, explaining why.
>>>>> And BTW, the latest Open Office ALSO supports writing to OOXML
>>>>> format...
>>>>>
>>>> As I've stated previously, what version?  I have installed OOo dev 3.4
>>>> (m95) and 3.3 OOo rc8 (m18) and I can't save as a "docx".
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Paul
>>>>
>>> They are using the Go-oo version so that explains it.  Plain old OOo does
>>> not have the docx save as docx ability.  If one reads the links in the
>>> original post they will find out why.  Hint: Novell is in bed with M$.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Does this mean that Go-oo is driven by Novell? The contact on
>> go-oo.org/about has a novell.com email address.
>>
>
> Yep.  Go back to the first message in this thread and follow the links.
>  Very eye opening.
>
> Andy
>

You're right, some interesting reading there and on the links.

The Go-oo homepage also says "Going forward, the Go-oo project will be
discontinued in favor of LibreOffice." Does that mean that LibreOffice
is driven by Novell too?

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:01 AM, Andy Brown  wrote:
> On Fri Dec 31 2010 10:53:16 GMT-0800 (PST)  Paul Gress wrote:
>>
>> On 12/31/10 07:50 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> The answer to ALL this nonsense is surely this.
>>> If you receive an OOXML document, politely reply to the sender and
>>> request that they send it in another format, explaining why.
>>> And BTW, the latest Open Office ALSO supports writing to OOXML format...
>>>
>>
>> As I've stated previously, what version?  I have installed OOo dev 3.4
>> (m95) and 3.3 OOo rc8 (m18) and I can't save as a "docx".
>>
>>
>> Paul
>>
>
> They are using the Go-oo version so that explains it.  Plain old OOo does
> not have the docx save as docx ability.  If one reads the links in the
> original post they will find out why.  Hint: Novell is in bed with M$.
>
>

Does this mean that Go-oo is driven by Novell? The contact on
go-oo.org/about has a novell.com email address.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
>
> On 2010/12/31 12:15 PM  Carl Symons wrote:
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Paul Gress  wrote:
>>>
>>> I checked my OOo, dev m95 (3.4), it doesn't support save as "docx" and
>>> 3.3
>>> rc8 (3.3 m18) also doesn't support "docx" in save as.  What version are
>>> you
>>> using that supports docx?
>>>
>> > From standard Kubuntu 10.10 repositories...
>>
>> OpenOffice.org 3.2.1
>> OOO320m19 (Build:9505)
>> ooo-build 3.2.1.4, Ubuntu package 1:3.2.1-7ubuntu1
>
> That is the Go-OO derivative. OOo downloaded from the OpenOffice.org website
> do not write to .docx format.
>
>
> Larry

Until this discussion thread, I was unaware of any difference. IIRC,
this version of OOo comes standard on the Kubuntu Live/Install CD, and
updated through standard repositories. (The startup splash screen has
the Oracle logo.) Much different from a Windows installation.

Whadda mess!

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 7:11 AM, Mark Preston  wrote:
> If I may inject what I hope is a little sense into this argument:-
>

Thank you for injecting sense into what had become entirely emotional
and irrational B^)


> A major strength of Open Office is and always was that it could read
> and often write documents in many proprietary formats. That strength
> should remain solidly a feature of Libre Office and for exactly the
> same reasons.
>
> When it comes to the Microsoft formats there is a significant issue
> with writing the formats - specifically, that even Microsoft cannot
> fully adhere to the standards they set. This is a major fault and it
> is one which Microsoft has placed into the marketplace.
>
> It leaves Libre Office with three choices when it comes to these
> formats. It can either:-
>
> 1. Write in the format as used by Microsoft.
> 2. Write in the format as specified in the ISO standard.
> 3. Refuse to write in the new formats at all.
>
> The problem with option 1 is that it is a strictly proprietary form
> which even Microsoft admits does not actually meet the open standard.
> It is therefore open to attacks using patent and other legislation if
> adopted by Libre Office.
>
> The problem with option 2 is that while it is an open standard it does
> not actually fully work with Microsoft Office and is therefore a
> pointless choice until (according to Microsoft) at least 2014.
>
> The problem with option 3 is that Libre Office would be left in the
> situation where its own files would need to be read by the ODF open
> feature in Microsoft Office, thus making Microsoft appear to be the
> ones making efforts to read "incompatible" formats. I would suggest
> that this is the very reason why Microsoft has taken this action with
> these formats.
>
> We are left, in short, with just two realistic choices. Either we
> reverse-engineer the OOXML as actually used and let Microsoft scream
> about it (as they certainly would) or we simply ignore the format for
> written documents and write them in the old "doc" format... while
> telling people clearly on the download website that this is because we
> are prevented from using the Microsoft "open" standard. Given the work
> involved in these choices, I would suggest the only realistic option
> is the latter one.
>

Sincere thank you for a well-reasoned and clear analysis. Better minds
than mine can decide whether or not it's complete.

The idea of requesting a document in a readable format is also useful.
Thanks to whoever in this monster thread suggested that. For the most
part, I'm exchanging documents with acquaintances (so much for trying
this trick with a recruiter who wants Word). Talking with them about
file formats is simple.

There's another dynamic at play here. Microsoft is facing a situation
where markets with big potential are choosing open source. They have
discounted MS products to near nothing to gain footholds in some of
these markets. BRIC markets (as described by IMF and The Economist)
are seen as up-and-coming. These countries--Brazil, Russia, India,
China--are making or have already made commitments to open source.
This is not good news for Microsoft. These countries represent serious
market potential.

If LibreOffice and other open source projects continue to operate as
welcoming communities with other interests than profits and growth,
then they will prosper. Some underlying principles support open source
software. These principles should inform the way that this issue and
others are resolved. Microsoft is obligated to do whatever it can to
maximize return on investments. LibO and most other true open source
projects also have stakeholders--us--who seek a different kind of
return. I want quality software with a community of users who
cooperate, where I can contribute and appreciate the contributions of
others.

Thanks again, Mark. Your message has the kind of clear thinking that I
appreciate in the open source community.

Carl Symons

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 1:55 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker
 wrote:



> And if you are sent an OOXML document to edit and return then it's bad
> manners not to send it back in the format it was sent to you, just like it's
> bad manners to receive a plain text email and reply in HTML
>

How about if I receive an HTML email and reply in plain text? If
that's a faux pas, I've been a very bad boy.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Paul Gress  wrote:
> On 12/30/10 08:09 PM, Carl Symons wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2493&p=169740#p169507
>>>>
>>>>>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101219121621828
>>>>>>
>>>>>> ; Unless this changes I will strongly advocate in the support groups
>>>>>>  I
>>>>>> participate the people stay with OpenOffice.org and not switch to
>>>>>>  LibreOffice.
>>
>> One minor point here...OOo also supports writing to docx format.
>>
>
> I checked my OOo, dev m95 (3.4), it doesn't support save as "docx" and 3.3
> rc8 (3.3 m18) also doesn't support "docx" in save as.  What version are you
> using that supports docx?
>
>From standard Kubuntu 10.10 repositories...

OpenOffice.org 3.2.1
OOO320m19 (Build:9505)
ooo-build 3.2.1.4, Ubuntu package 1:3.2.1-7ubuntu1

Screenshot attached.


>
>
> Also, for what it's worth, saving as a docx to me is a bad idea.  I've
> imported doc files extensively in the past, straightened them out to view
> properly, saved as an odt, then saved as a doc again only to find some
> different formatting doesn't come out correctly with the doc.  I suspect
> docx will be worse.  I have got many people in the past to convert to OOo.
>  I will now promote them to Libreoffice.  I cannot move over myself as I use
> Solaris 11 Express (similar to Opensolaris) which there is no port.
>
> --

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

Thank you Olivier for jumping in on this as one of the TDF founders.
And thank you for helping to make LibreOffice happen.

More below...

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 6:16 PM, Olivier Hallot
 wrote:
> HI
>
> Em 30-12-2010 18:41, Larry Gusaas escreveu:
>>
>> On 2010/12/30 2:19 PM Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
>>>
>>> OOXML will spread anyway because MS Office 2007 and 2010 use this
>>> format by default. Nothing you can do about it I'm afraid
>>
>> Yes you can do something about it. Don't enable writing in that format.
>> Use PDF's for communicating. If a MS user needs to be able to modify a
>> document, use .doc format. There is no need to use .docx format. MS
>> Office 2008 and 2011 can still read .doc files.
>>
>>
>
> The thing is, *you can* prevent LibreOffice/OOo from writing in proprietary
> format. This requires a configuration in one of the xcu/xcs config files.
>
> Happy new year
> --
> Olivier Hallot

If it is this easy to disable selected formats, I ask that the TDF
Steering Committee take the suggestions in this conversation thread
into consideration. Larry Gusaas has cited some sources (in the thread
starter) that suggest that Microsoft is again (ab)using their
near-monopoly market position to subvert openness. While there's no
need for the TDF to police or punish Microsoft's behavior, there are
strong reasons for the LibreOffice community to stand for and protect
the open nature of LibO applications and their file formats. There is
no reason to support writing/saving as docx/OOXML except to go along
with Microsoft's anti-open fraud and deception.

Carl Symons

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 2:14 PM, BRM  wrote:
several thread entries truncated

>> >>
>> >> I will not support  or use LibreOffice
>> >>  until it stops helping spread OOXML by enabling  writing in this file
>> >> format. There is absolutely no need to write in  this proprietary format.
> To
>> >> do so is contrary to the principle of  using ODF and open source formats.
>> >>
>> >> See the  following:
>> >>
>> >>
>>http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2493&p=169740#p169507
>>
>> >> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101219121621828
>> >>
>> >> ; Unless this changes I will strongly advocate in the support groups  I
>> >> participate the people stay with OpenOffice.org and not switch to
>> >>  LibreOffice.

One minor point here...OOo also supports writing to docx format.

>
> Perhaps LibO and all other Open Source projects - and perhaps anyone 
> supporting
> ODF for that matter - should treat OOXML like Microsoft treats ODF and other
> formats - as third party as possible.
> In other words, read support should be something that users must enable; Save
> support should not be possible - it must be converted to either an older MS
> format (e.g. doc, xls) or ODF.
> We need to force MS to support ODF - as others have pointed out ODF is quickly
> becoming the world standard at least at the government level - which means in 
> a
> few years most organizations that support governments will need to support ODF
> too, and a few years after that organizations that support those 
> organizations,
> and so forth. MS has lost the file format battle to ODF - it's just time 
> before
> OOXML (especially) and their legacy formats are gone.

As another writer has pointed out, forcing MS in these ways is
self-defeating. MS is not going to be forced in any direction. MS
managers are going to fulfill their legal obligation...make money,
enrich investors. LibO & TDF do not have this requirement. Attempts to
make things difficult for MS will really only make things difficult
for those people who are "required" to use MS products. Many of those
users don't have a choice. It is not appropriate to bruise users in
order to teach MS a lesson...a lesson that they probably won't learn
anyway.

A key point here needs amplification. As a USA citizen (even in
Washington State, up the road from Redmond) and an open source
community participant, my view is probably warped...I think that MS
has gone over the line of propriety many times with almost no adverse
consequence. They operate as a de facto monopoly. The US regulatory
agencies have done little to curb this anti-social behavior. To people
who live in another countries, I can only imagine how this behavior
appears. Surveys and anecdotes indicate that computer users in other
countries than the USA report software to be a sovereignty issue. LibO
has an international scope. Governments (Russia recently for example)
are moving to LibO and other open source applications to remove
themselves from the MS hegemony.

Reading a range of formats and offering the ability to save in a range
of formats is generous and supportive of the little person user. Going
along with MS' efforts to destroy the open document format does not,
in the end, support the little person user. MS has a near monopoly;
they use it to the greatest extent possible. The ultimate result of
unethical monopoly behavior is that the monopolist's products drive
other products out. There is no valid reason for aiding MS' efforts to
damage open source.


>
> The idea of LibO/etc reading OOXML pushes the issue - just like MS did to so
> many other formats to get people to convert to their formats.
> After all, what's good for the goose is good for the gander, no?
>

No, just because MS does it doesn't make it right. They are using
their market power unfairly. If LibreOffice focuses on serving users
generously, then _reading_ OOXML documents fits. Writing or saving as
OOXML only damages open source applications; there is no benefit to
users (as long as documents can be saved in a legitimate way). OOXML
is a wolf in sheep's clothing.

> Of course, all functionality should be dually advertised - with explanations 
> as
> to why.
>
> Ben
>
> P.S. I am not advocating vengeance - just equal and fair play.
> P.P.S BTW, Office 2007 and later often get set to use the legacy formats by
> default as many organizations don't use OOXML if they have an  organizational
> standard. It's only those that don't that continue using  the defaults.
>

When somebody buys a new version of Office, their default save format
is docx. I've worked with less sophisticated users who get a new
computer and new Office to work from home. They can't understand why
their teachers (running earlier Office versions) can't open their
file. This is a bad deal that MS has foisted on people.

It is not necessary to make them pay for this bad behavior...it
wouldn't make much difference. But we shouldn't be accomplices to
their crime.

Carl

-

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:14 PM, Steven Shelton
 wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/30/2010 12:27 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote:
>> I will not support or use LibreOffice
>> until it stops helping spread OOXML by enabling writing in this
>> file format. There is absolutely no need to write in this
>> proprietary format. To do so is contrary to the principle of using
>> ODF and open source formats.
>
> On the other hand . . . isn't that doing exactly what MS does? Do two
> wrongs make a right?

No that is not what MS does. MS reads & writes in proprietary formats.
They do not support open source formats. LibO should read any format
and have the ability to write in proprietary formats. It should not
write in proprietary formats masquerading as open formats. LibO should
not go along with MS' chicanery. LibO is not engaging in deceptive
practices.

I thought the idea behind this particular office
> suite was to make any file accessible to the extent possible. That's
> why I use it. Regardless of what LibO does, MS is going to continue to
> use OOXML, and if the open source suites don't support it, then they
> are shooting themselves in the foot and essentially doing MS's bidding
> by ensuring that people who want to exchange files in that format have
> to buy MS products.
>
> - --
> Steven Shelton

Any file format would still be accessible to read. If someone sends
you a docx file, you will be able to open it. You can send a .doc (no
x; no OOXML) file back to to them; they will be able to read it with
their MS application. By sending a .docx file, the only thing
accomplished is that MS has weakened open source.

People can still exchange files in MS formats. The other user will
still be able to use their MS applications. Not allowing docx _write_
ensures that MS nefarious scheme has been weakened. Other than that,
no effect.

If the LibO community doesn't take a stand on this issue, who else
will? Simply put, MS is doing false advertising. Do you think that the
FTC is gonna do anything about it? Not a prayer. MS has their cover
with the Standards Committee decision. And how likely is it that some
U.S. CongressCritter would allow the FTC to take action anyway?

Carl Symons

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 12:19 PM, Gordon Burgess-Parker
 wrote:
> On 30/12/10 17:27, Larry Gusaas wrote:
>>
>> I will not support or use LibreOffice
>>  until it stops helping spread OOXML by enabling writing in this file
>> format. There is absolutely no need to write in this proprietary format. To
>> do so is contrary to the principle of using ODF and open source formats.
>>
>> See the following:
>>
>> http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2493&p=169740#p169507
>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101219121621828
>>
>> Unless this changes I will strongly advocate in the support groups I
>> participate the people stay with OpenOffice.org and not switch to
>> LibreOffice.
>>
>>
> OOXML will spread anyway because MS Office 2007 and 2010 use this format by
> default. Nothing you can do about it I'm afraid
>

MS may create documents in OOXML by default. LibO can read them too.

Larry Gusaas' original point was to avoid helping MS with this
anti-open scheme. LibO should not help MS "...spread OOXML by enabling
writing in this file format..." In other words, make it so that LibO
can _read_ OOXML documents, but not _write/save as_ this format.
Enable LibO to _write_ in MS' proprietary .doc format, but not their
fake "open" format. It is not open. The intent of this fake file
format is to damage open software applications.

It is similar to what they did with web standards, their own special
Java, their own special C++. MS bribed their way into getting OOXML
accepted as an ISO open standard. Truly open applications shouldn't go
along with this scam. MS has suffered very little for their bad
behavior.

Even MS Office users (prior to 2007) have had trouble with this docx fraud.

Read the links in Larry Gusaas' original message in this thread. This
is what the open community is up against. We don't have to go along
with it.

By the way, there is nothing inherently wrong with what MS is doing
here. The U.S. system rewards corporations that flirt with the
boundaries of legality. The Standards Committee went along with this,
and the U.S. hapless regulatory system can't/won't come to the rescue.
It is up to the open community to deal with it. Don't make it possible
for an open application to write in a file format that seeks to damage
it.

Carl Symons

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Do not support writing to OOXML format

[Carl Symons]

I support Larry's position.

Carl Symons

On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 9:27 AM, Larry Gusaas  wrote:
> I will not support or use LibreOffice
>  until it stops helping spread OOXML by enabling writing in this file
> format. There is absolutely no need to write in this proprietary format. To
> do so is contrary to the principle of using ODF and open source formats.
>
> See the following:
> http://user.services.openoffice.org/en/forum/viewtopic.php?f=49&t=2493&p=169740#p169507
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20101219121621828
>
> Unless this changes I will strongly advocate in the support groups I
> participate the people stay with OpenOffice.org and not switch to
> LibreOffice.
>
>
> --
> _
>
>
>     Larry I. Gusaas
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] [website][drupal] The Drupal website development update - December 2010

[Carl Symons]

Thanks to this group for all the work. After working on a Drupal site
for a F/OSS Fest in the U.S., I appreciate how much work this can be.

Carl

On Sat, Dec 18, 2010 at 1:56 AM, Michael Wheatland
 wrote:
> I thought it was about time to share some of the progress that the
> Drupal website development team has made since the last update.
> You can view the progress of the site at www.libreofficeaustralia.org
> (Note that international pages have not yet been setup)
>
> I would like to express my thanks to everyone who has been
> contributing to the Drupal site development so far, the development of
> the workflows and behind the scenes systems is fantastic.
> Since the last update we have:
>
> Put together a temporary theme (So people can get a feel for the site)
> Created a video support section, where authorised people can submit
> externally hosted tutorial videos
> Refined some of the forums systems (Still working on the mailing list
> type functionality)
> Created a governance system whereby SC members can propose agendas and
> submit meeting minutes
>             The system automatically displays info on the next
> upcoming meeting from proposed agendas and you can play minutes
> recordings without downloading the file
> Setup a facebook support page where anyone can ask questions. We are
> currently working on ways for two way communication with FB and other
> social networks.
> In the process of creating an interactive FAQ section
> Creating the concept for the brainstorm system - This is a big
> undertaking and needs to be planned carefully for integration with
> other systems
> Interactive Project Teams now have their own forums and announcement
> areas (restricted posting to team members only)
>
> There are many other facets of work which I will not go into right
> now, but suffice to say that I am very proud of the work that the
> Drupal Website Development Team is doing.
> We will soon have more contact with the project teams to refine and
> revise the work we have implemented to suit their UI and workflow
> needs.
>
> The main area which we will concentrate on after the new year will be
> internationalisation and working with the native language teams to
> adapt our website design to suit their needs and incorporate
> suggestions from those teams across all languages.
>
> Again, a huge thankyou to all of those who have been involved with the
> development so far. There is still a lot of development to go for the
> resulting community site ,I encourage you to get more involved (time
> permitting) now, or after LibreOffice 3.3 has been released into the
> wild.
>
> Michael Wheatland
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] opening big chinese docx file cause LO crash many times.

[Carl Symons]

On Tue, Dec 14, 2010 at 6:15 PM, Jih-Yao Lin  wrote:
> the chinese big file is about 300kb, and when i change the content and save 
> it, LO crash.
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>
>

That sounds like what happens to me nearly every time I use Microsoft products.

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Name Change for LibreOffice Applications

[Carl Symons]

On Tue, Dec 7, 2010 at 8:50 AM, Steven Shelton  wrote:
>
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> On 12/7/2010 11:40 AM, Eduardo Moreno wrote:
>> El 07/12/10 10:20, Samuel Mehrbrodt escribió:
>>> Today there was an announcement that KOffice got a new name
>>> (Calligra) and they also renamed some of the Applications.
>>> "KWord" became "Words", "KSpread" became "Tables" and
>>> "KPresenter" was renamed to "Stages".
>>>

The KOffice name changes were _necessary_ for organizational reasons.
The changes--names and more--provoked some valuable dynamics amongst
the entire Calligra team. One minor change--KPresenter was renamed
Stage (singular). Taken together, the Calligra application names
communicate some interesting perspectives on what the applications do.

In the case of LibreOffice, changing the names of applications would
be an unnecessary handicap. Some part of the value of the names is the
continuity with OpenOffice. I like the idea of an OOo fork that is
driven by an independent, free team rather than a greedy megalomaniac.

>>> I was wondering whether such a name change has been considered
>>> for the LibreOffice Applications.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I like the names of the applications.
>
>
> I do, too, and I think they are consistent, descriptive (what the heck
> does "stages" mean?), and well-known throughout the community of
> users. I don't see a need to change simply for the sake of change.
>
> - --
> Steven Shelton
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
> Version: GnuPG v2.0.12 (MingW32)
> Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
>
> iEYEARECAAYFAkz+ZboACgkQXUonIzCvpdNNwACfXbpcEixZeC89qjR8iw0wzkLq
> mPAAnit0ijubFx0a8Tlt8IVBjk3dTGUY
> =rW61
> -END PGP SIGNATURE-
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
> Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
> *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***
>

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: A better idea for a download package.

[Carl Symons]

On Tue, Nov 30, 2010 at 12:10 PM, leif  wrote:
> Den 30-11-2010 11:43, plino skrev:
>> The point here is that OOo has a small installer with 140Mb (no Java, and
>> only English, Spanish and French dictionaries).
>> Why is LO going in the opposite direction with 299 and 466Mb???
> Agree. This is a problem
>>
>> I think that an English only version of LibreOffice and then separate
>> Language Packs (10-40Mb) which include the translation for the interface and
>> dictionaries, spelling, etc is the best option.
>>
> No no no no no no!
>
> If you think all people on this planet are native English speaking you
> are wrong. Please. We have discussed this so many times that I don't
> believe we still are.
>
> English installer + native lang-pack is a no-go!

Nobody said that everyone is native English speaking. I promise you
that you speak English orders of magnitude better than I speak
whatever your native language is. The problem is that there is a core
of functionality that all languages can use, along with the need for
application language localized to users - the more the merrier.

English has become the lingua franca of the Web, whatever the cause
and whatever the effect.

If LibO ships in one language with optional language packs, then what
language do you suggest?

If LibO ships in all possible languages, then what do you suggest for
people on a 56kbps connection?

>
> LibreOffice is an international project - not an English one that
> happens to be translated.
>
>
> /Leif Lodahl
> Representing 500.000 users who are *not* native English
>
perhaps representing far fewer than that. You are probably not
representing people who have no problem getting a fine program in
whatever language along with a language packs in their own language.

It's gonna be a challenge getting liftoff with the basic LibreOffice
capability. Why take on changing a fundamental aspect of the Web in
addition? IMO, this attitude will result in no LibreOffice and English
still "spoken" on the Web.

Carl


-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Request: Installation Instructions

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Nov 25, 2010 at 3:54 PM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 04:44:42PM -0500, Marc Par� wrote:
>> Le 2010-11-24 16:20, Robert Holtzman a écrit :
>>
>> The best and most practical way is to help them out. The bottom line
>> is that we would like every type of individuals to use our office
>> suite and to be happy with it. I have yet to be on one "help" list
>> or help forum where this question has not been asked and the best
>> approach has always been to be courteous and help out. It always
>> leave the user grateful and satisfied.
>
> One of the best ways to help them out would be to (gently, if that makes
> you feel better) instruct them that it is customary to do a modicum of
> research and try what's found before posting a question to a list. Also,
> the post should include the standard information, s/w version, OS, etc.
> If you have been participating in mail lists for very long, I'm
> surprised you don't recommend this yourself.
>
>>
>> Let's not assume that they can't/refuse"won't make an effort to
>> learn and just help them out. After all, they are here for help.
>>
>> If there are too many of these individuals on our help lists, then I
>> would say that our help list has internal problems that need to be
>> addressed. This would be more of our problem than theirs.
>
> This might be true if the contributors to the list were paid employees
> or if the posters were paying for help. In that case pandering to lazy
> users with an infuriating sense of entitlement might be excused because
> one does not piss off a paying customer. The truth is, however, that the
> contributors are unpaid volunteers who hang here from altruistic
> motives and as such are entitled to the respect of not having their time
> wasted trying to guess the problem from incomplete questions.

I have no problem guiding someone who needs to learn how to ask
questions. Somewhere I've got that page bookmarked
(http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html) and refer people
to it occasionally. I too am put off by people who feel entitled to
immediate help and abuse the knowledgeable mailing list contributors.
In a similar way, it is a turn off to hear some arrogant blather from
one of the knowledgeable contributors who insists that everyone
interact with the list in a particular way. Both are inconsiderate.

Following this thread, I recall no one saying that the knowledgeable
contributors are not entitled to respect. They also don't need to
waste their time guessing problems. It is a simple matter of someone
replying to the message, respectfully pointing out the need for
complete information. There is no need to belittle people or beat them
up because they don't use CLI.


>
> This may have little to do with installation instructions but it
> addresses the flavor I'm getting from some of the messages that *all*
> users should be catered to and the clueless ones not be guided into the
> right way to ask questions but be tolerated and spoon fed. I have
> nothing against clueless users. That's how everyone starts out but, I
> remember being guided (sometimes not so gently) in how to ask questions.
> I'm not advocating *all* noobs become proficient sysadmins but running a
> few simple searches and trying a few things is a far cry from that.
>
> As far as I'm concerned there is too much of what I call the servant
> mentality on this list. I don't find nearly as much on any of the other
> lists I'm involved with, including the ubuntu-users and firefox-support
> lists which get their share of newly minted users who barely know how to
> turn their computer on.
>
> Feel free to disagree with me but that's my take on these things.
>
> --
> Bob Holtzman

I do not recall any recommendation that noobs shouldn't be guided to
be effective in their queries. F/OSS forums and mailing lists function
amazingly well, and mailing list/forum etiquette is common across most
of the ones I know about.  I too started as a dummy (well, more of a
dummy). I couldn't figure out why there was no reply to my question
about lspci-v (no space). It took me several days to figure out the
format of CLI commands. No one beat the crap out of me; there was just
no answer. It took me several days to understand why. It was a
respectful lesson about Linux.

Considering that Ubuntu/Kubuntu users have been singled out in this
discussion...
   The first post in ubuntuforums is:
  [sticky] Suggestions on how to get your support questions
answered as quickly as possible
   and in kubuntuforums: Please Read Before Posting/Search before
posting (also sticky)
It might be useful to point those ()ubuntu or other naive users to
these posts.

I see nothing wrong with guiding a new user with a few direct words
about community software and a link to ESR's smart question site
(maybe there could be a LibO "Read This First"). That's not
disrespectful. If someone is a jerk who thinks that they are entitled
to an immediate answer from well-meaning volunteers, it's 

[tdf-discuss] Re: Vision/Mission

[Carl Symons]

On Wed, Nov 24, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Thorsten Wilms  wrote:
> Hi!
>
> This only saw a little bit of discussion on the marketing list (after
> the first draft was met with silence here).
>
> I like the interpretation, that there is not much to anything
> objectionable or to add, better than the alternatives, so I went on and
> placed the newest version on:
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Mission
>
> Actually, I would really like to have a better definition of what is
> being addressed with a so called office suite. What's the thing that
> ties the package together?
>
>
> --
> Thorsten Wilms
>

I use LibreOffice, but I don't use an "office productivity solution"
(c&p'd from Mission). What's needed is a phrase that accurately and
succinctly provides a conceptual container for LibreOffice elements.
Something that connects for users. To me, "office productivity
solution" or "office suite" sound like overblown marketing (no offense
meant by that).

Kudos to Microsoft for laying claim to "Office". The "kleenex" of
business software...a generic name. Microsoft also use "office suite",
and have likely somewhere used something about "office productivity".

"LibreOffice" already locates the products in the Office world. It may
be that people now associate "Office" with the kinds of tasks that
LibreOffice supports. But how about a student paper, a recipe
collection, and other activities that are not really done at or in an
office?

How about just a simple statement of the LibreOffice components?
Suggestions below, none of which do the trick for me, but maybe a
trigger for more creative people...

LibreOffice Tools for Work
Software for writing, presenting and record-keeping
LibreOffice Collection
LibreOffice Tools for (the) People

This is a hard question, Thorsten. But it's a good one to communicate
whatever sets LibO apart.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Carl Symons]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Robert Holtzman  wrote:
> On Tue, Nov 23, 2010 at 01:30:19AM +0930, Michael Wheatland wrote:

>> Yes I was most defininately referring to Rene's comments.
>> I have experienced a similar type of arrogance amongst 2 other open
>> source projects, one of which was resolved quickly and resolutely by
>> it's members actively denouncing such attitudes within the community.
>
> A little gratuitous advice (not criticism). If you are new to mailing
> lists be aware that you should develop a thick skin. You're dealing
> with people and some people have shorter fuses than others. If they come
> across to you as arrogant you have several options. Ignore them, dig
> through the perceived arrogance to see what they are trying to convey,
> or filter their posts. The last runs the risk of missing out on
> important information.
>
> FWIW my attitude toward people learning at least the rudiments of their
> OS, beyond merely where to point and click, is quite similar to Rene's.
>>

In like fashion, people who don't want to put up with gratuitous
profanity have the same right to speak up about it. The person who
acts in ways that others perceive as arrogant and uses language that
detracts from conversations runs the risk of being dismissed. This
train runs both ways. The idea that profanity is sometimes required is
laughable. Why is that? To make a point more forcefully. To derail a
conversation. Whatever. The Document Foundation is a community
offering valuable software. Profanity IMO is unnecessary.

It is not anywhere written in the mission of the Document Foundation
that users have to learn anything about installation. However, there
is this on the LibreOffice page, "...improving how to make the
software available to our users." It would seem that Italo's position
is more in keeping with the apparent tech-elite proposed by Rene and
Robert Holtzman. You are certainly free to hold the opinion and impose
it on people that you support. It appears as though the requirement
that people have to know their OS before they can use LibO is going
down in defeat. Time for more swearing!!!

Italo, I work on several open source projects. Almost everyone else
involved is a developer (I'm more in your camp, although the dpkg -i
x86_64 .deb issue is well within my ability). In every case, there is
shared emphasis on users. What benefits the users? There's a whole lot
to that of course. But in no case is there the attitude that people
need to learn some level of the OS before they are considered worthy
of the product. Thank you for your work in making the Document
Foundation happen. I believe that you are on the right side of this
issue.

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Request: Installation Instructions

[Carl Symons]

On Mon, Nov 22, 2010 at 10:46 AM, Lee Hyde  wrote:
>
>


>
> On 22/11/10 17:50, Rene Engelhard wrote:
>> No, my position taken to the logical conclusion would not be that (as I think
>> there's use cases for GUIs - I didn't say anything against them here but just
>> mentioned that dpkg is basics - we don't need GUIs but that we need a 
>> "drivers license"
>> for computers. Mandatory for everyone who wants to use PCs.
>>
>> The same as if you would not be allowed to drive a car if you don't know 
>> where
>> the steering wheel or the gas pedal is, neither would you be allowed to use 
>> a gear car
>> when you only know automatic.
>>
>> Learn basics, or live with people telling you that you need to look at 
>> basics before
>> you do stuff.
>
> This is an absolutely horrendous view to hold! Such patronising views
> only serve to hold back the FOSS community. Strange as it may seem to
> you Rene, many are intimedated by the command line. They shouldn't be,
> but they are, and your above comments will do nothing to assuage such
> end-users. In fact there more likely to turn back to Windows or MacOSX
> than adapt to your way of thinking/doing. Some of us like our icon
> metaphors and prefer our double-click > install to your open terminal >
> navigate to directory > dpkg -i *.deb.
>
> Also, The reason that people are required to qualify for a driving
> license before driving a car is that behind the wheel of a car a bad
> driver can easily kill a fellow road-user/cyclist/pedestrian. Now unless
> the 1980s film 'War Games' was an accurate representation of computing
> the same cannot be said of a technophobic office worker, in fact if
> anything they be better off staying well clear of the command line.
>
> I'm afraid that your patronizing 'get orf my land you idiot' mentality
> will serve only to exclude the vast majority of end-users, as it has in
> the past, and without a significant user base LibreOffice will
> degenerate into little more than a hobby project and rightly so (if it
> chooses to alienate the majority of computer users instead of embrace them).
>
> --

+1, Lee.

It would be good if people understood the tools that they use. But
they don't. And they won't. And they shouldn't have to in order to use
basic communication tools such as LibreOffice.

Expecting people to have a "license to compute" is quixotic. It is
simply not going to happen. There is no good reason to make
LibreOffice installation any more difficult than other run-of-the-mill
applications, whatever platform is involved.

Rene, (cordially) Your attitude seems more appropriate to a radical
LUGr or a Microsoft plant than to a group that is trying to get some
liftoff force for a F/OSS project that has a lot of potential. How is
it part of the DocumentFoundation mission to change people's basic
software installation habit?

There are plenty enough hurdles without trying to force behavior
changes artificially. What could you do to help the project succeed?

Carl

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***

Re: [tdf-discuss] Libreoffice 3.3 Beta 3

[Carl Symons]

On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 12:31 PM, Charles Marcus
 wrote:
> On 2010-11-18 3:03 PM, Jesús Corrius wrote:
>> On Thu, Nov 18, 2010 at 8:41 PM, Charles Marcus
>>  wrote:
>>> OOo is currently at 3.3rc5 - anyone know what LibO 3.3b3 is based on?
>>> Will there be any kind of consistency between them?
>>
>> According to the internal version numbers, LibO 3.3b3 is based on OOo 3.3rc2.
>
> Bummer - so lots of bug-fixes in OOo 3.3rc5 that aren't in LibO 3.3b3...
>
> Anyone using it yet? Is it stable enough for daily use?
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Charles
>

I'm using it everyday. It's working fine. The release notes indicate
where troubles may arise. They may not affect you.

Carl

--
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***