Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 3/16/2014 12:24 PM, Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: I don't think the OP's original question silly. I think he or she wanted to know if LibréOffice's support for MS Office formats was compatible with those of MS Office's. A reasonable question, in my view. If the question was is it 100% compatible, then yes, it is a very silly *and* unreasonable question - since even the different versions of Microsoft Office are not 100% compatible, and in my opinion, this is purely intentional to try to keep as many of their (microsofts) customers on the upgrade train as possible. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 16/03/2014, Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: Practical implementations of a proposed standard are wonderful, but, before it's part of the standard, documents written with such extensions are, _by definition_, non-standard formats. It's a worry that some users prefer new features over standards compliance and quality control. In my opinion: LibréOffice ought not be writing documents, by default, in non-standard formats. Agree, it means that if a user is concerned about compatibility, they must understand to disable the default settings in LO. How does OO compare; are documents created to the odf standard by default? -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 3/16/2014 12:07 PM, Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: Once again: Putting the cart before the horse. LO does not define the standard. OASIS or ISO (depending upon one's perspective, I suppose) defines the standard. LO's responsibility is to faithfully *implement* the standard. As the *leading* 'user' of the format, I would argue otherwise. How else are new features and improvements supposed to make it into the standard, if someone doesn't actually start implementing them in the real world? I guess you prefer the Microsoft way of pushing out huge new changes all at once with a new release of Office, thereby forcing all of their users to experience pain unless until they all upgrade? Sorry, I much prefer the Libreoffice/OASIS/ODF way. If you want document fidelity across different platforms/programs, use PDF. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 17/03/14 11:41, e-letter wrote: It's a worry that some users prefer new features over standards compliance and quality control. Please do not see new software features as changes to the document format. Over 99% of new features do not have any impact on the document format, which is the same as before. And there might be a change in the document format which is not reflected in any software feature. So, new software features and standard compliance are different problems/issues. When you talk about standards document formats you never consider software features, because the two are not related. You should really have a look at some of the OASIS ODF TC meeting minutes to understand what the standard is about. Agree, it means that if a user is concerned about compatibility, they must understand to disable the default settings in LO. No, if a user is concerned about interoperability - as I am - he should use the ODF 1.2 Extended document format, because this is the format with the best standard compatibility. How does OO compare; are documents created to the odf standard by default? Same as LibreOffice. Actually, the extended format strategy was started by OOo when OOo 2.0 was launched back in 2005, and has been maintained so far. Actually, not even Microsoft was able to complain with this strategy, and has never dared to say that the ODF Extended document format was not standard. -- Italo Vignoli - italo.vign...@gmail.com mob IT +39.348.5653829 - mob EU +39.392.7481795 sip it...@libreoffice.org - skype italovignoli GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On March 17, 2014 3:41:24 AM PDT, e-letter wrote: It's a worry that some users prefer new features over standards compliance and quality control. It is extremely rare for features to have a negative impact on standards compliance. It is not uncommon for features to enhance standards compliance. Whether or not a new feature hinders or enhances quality control, depend upon how well the affected source code is documented and how structured the program as a whole is. One of the major obstacles that Microsoft ran into, and why it could not adhere to EEU court rulings, was that its source code was not documented, and the overall program was completely unstructured. Both Apache OpenOffice and LibreOffice are refactoring the OOo codebase, so that quality control related to standards compliance is enhanced. jonathon -- Your documents, your language, your way. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Owen Genat wrote No. The information provided by Italo up-thread is correct: italovignoli wrote ... ODF 1.2 which is in the process of becoming an ISO standard (backward compatible with ODF 1.0). Standard definitions, by their own nature, are moving slowly. Interesting. This means that ODF 1.2 is an OASIS approved standard since 2011 but isn't yet an ISO standard... So, I apologize to OASIS :) It's the ISO standard that takes ages... This just proves my point (going back to the comment by nabbler) that it if the bureaucracy takes so long, you can't really blame MS (or any other vendor) for not being 100% compatible. In fact it is impossible that any other office suite produces 100% compatible ODF documents since by definition LO is one of the products defining the ODF characteristics... Absurdly Microsoft (as an OASIS member) could also legitimately be producing another ODF 1.2 extended file format (valid under OASIS) but completely different from the one in LO... So, the question if m$office is compatible with the ODF standard of LO doesn't make sense ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101661.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 16/03/14 09:01, Pedro wrote: This just proves my point (going back to the comment by nabbler) that it if the bureaucracy takes so long, you can't really blame MS (or any other vendor) for not being 100% compatible. No. Compatibility is measured against the standard (ISO ODF 1.0 / OASIS ODF 1.2). and not with the ODF 1.2 Extended provided by LibreOffice. Microsoft ODF implementation in MS Office 2013 is a very good one, and no one is blaming Microsoft for this. On the contrary, Microsoft can be blamed for their intentional ODF 1.1 - which has never been considered a standard, not even at OASIS - implementation in Microsoft Office 2010, because this was done to kill interoperability with OOo. In addition, Microsoft is providing a different implementation of their non standard OOXML document format for every Microsoft Office release, and this is also intentional to kill imteroperability. -- Italo Vignoli - italo.vign...@gmail.com mob IT +39.348.5653829 - mob EU +39.392.7481795 sip it...@libreoffice.org - skype italovignoli GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 15/03/2014, Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 03:25:43 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: nabbler wrote Please go to m$ and ask if m$office is compatible with the ODF standard of LO THAT is exactly the problem! There should never be an ODF standard of LO. [snip] I read that as compatible with the ODF standard, as implemented in LO. I.e.: LO uses the ODF standard. Does MS Office? Did I read that wrong? Or does LO not properly implement the ODF standard? It seems that only yourself and IV (in terms of responses, of course!) understood correctly. Once again, these types of questions expose a strategic weakness of those seeking to see open source software increase in popularity. The original question asked whether LO is compatible with m$, hence the reciprocal question as the answer. It is not known why the original poster (HB) asked this (silly) question: is (s)he an m$ fan, read elsewhere that LO is compatible with m$ the therefore concludes that LO is a m$ to create perfect m$ documents without having to pay the m$ tax (licence fee)? If the answer is (hopefully) no, then the poster should ask LO about compatibility with m$, but instead compatibility with odf (and also ask m$ the same question!). If the original poster and other m$-fans want perfect m$ documents (a laughable concept, considering the poor quality of m$o, but that's another discussion), they should please stop complaining, stop asking and simply pay for a legal copy of m$!!! LO is not an m$-clone! It (rightly) has nothing to do with m$! The native file format of LO is odf, _not_ m$!!! It was amazing to read that there should never be an odf standard, because LO is so perfect with the rapid introduction of gratuitous new features (10-year bugs? Who cares about quality, when we have a new feature to rush out now!). This is the exact strategy of m$, netscape, etc. in the past: embrace (the standard); extend (the standard); extinguish (kill the standard!). Apparently, Oasis are at fault for being slow, methodical and serious about standards development (by definition, a rigourous, tedious and necessarily time-consuming job); therefore LO should continue to improve. As commented elsewhere, such an opinion is ignorant of the concept of the standard development process... If the default behaviour of LO is to produce documents _beyond_ the current odf standard, it's a bad idea, equivalent to the extend the standard mentality as described previously. If LO wants to see the development of odf (not necessarily the increase in LO usage: the two objectives are not equal!), so that the strategic benefit of true document compatibility is maintained, the odf standard must be the default. Users must then be made aware of any non-standard features (writing a list of these new features in the release notes is not enough and merely an expedient action). Those interested in the odf standard for future document compability and flexibility want to be able to write an odf text document today in lowriter, an openformula compliant ods spreadsheet tomorrow in localc and be able to use (in theory, not confirmed) odf-compliant gnumeric, or abiword, or kwrite, etc. 10 years from now to open those documents. Otherwise, what is the purpose of the odf standard? -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 20:49:32 -0700 (PDT) Owen Genat owen.ge...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] There is a statement on the OASIS website (which unfortunately I cannot find at present) which indicates that in order for a new feature to be included in ODF-Next by OASIS, it must first be implemented in a few different pieces of software e.g., Apache OO, LO, and AbiWord (2+ or 3+ implementations from memory). ODF needs to be practical (based on real-world use cases) and community-driven rather than a theoretical specification developed in isolation by a chosen few. [snip] Given the way OASIS is organized (I'm assuming the description given previously is essentially accurate in the important aspects): developed in isolation by a chosen few is a non-issue, right out of the gate. Practical implementations of a proposed standard are wonderful, but, before it's part of the standard, documents written with such extensions are, _by definition_, non-standard formats. In my opinion: LibréOffice ought not be writing documents, by default, in non-standard formats. I am disappointed to find that it does :( To add insult-to-injury: 1.2 Extended is, in my opinion, misleading. It does not clearly indicate that what it really means is 1.2 with new and improved, but non-standard, features. I'm an IT guy with many, many years experience, and, even had I noticed that buried option on my own, it would not have occurred to me to wonder I wonder if that means it's non-standard? Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 01:01:38 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] In fact it is impossible that any other office suite produces 100% compatible ODF documents since by definition LO is one of the products defining the ODF characteristics... [snip] Once again: Putting the cart before the horse. LO does not define the standard. OASIS or ISO (depending upon one's perspective, I suppose) defines the standard. LO's responsibility is to faithfully *implement* the standard. LO might reasonably also play testbed for proposed new standards, but that ought to be optional behaviour, explicitly chosen by the user(s), not default, out-of-the-box behaviour. At least in *my* opinion. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 14:43:09 + e-letter inp...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] The original question asked whether LO is compatible with m$, hence the reciprocal question as the answer. It is not known why the original poster (HB) asked this (silly) question: ... [snip] I don't think the OP's original question silly. I think he or she wanted to know if LibréOffice's support for MS Office formats was compatible with those of MS Office's. A reasonable question, in my view. The poor guy or gal, rather than getting an answer to his or her question, instead ran into a buzz saw of anti-proprietary-formats sentiment, criticisms of Microsoft's behaviour and arguments about LO's implementation of non-standard standards. So, to answer the OP's original question (at least as I believe it to have meant): Kind of more-or-less. Probably more more than less :). I use the LibréOffice suite *exclusively*, and encounter few problems with the documents generated by my MS-Office-using colleagues. In fact: The only problem I've run into recently was attempting to export an MS Word document into PDF. LibréOffice Writer mangled the output. I had to resort to MS Office on my company laptop, booted into MS-Windows, accomplish the task. My experience is limited to .doc/.docx and .xls/.xlsx files. I do no PowerPoint (tho I did once do a presentation in LO's native presentation format), nor do I use the database application (Base). Is Draw able to read/write Visio files? Never even thought about that. I don't do much of that kind of thing, either. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 03/16/2014 12:24 PM, Jim Seymour wrote: On Sun, 16 Mar 2014 14:43:09 + e-letter inp...@gmail.com wrote: [snip] The original question asked whether LO is compatible with m$, hence the reciprocal question as the answer. It is not known why the original poster (HB) asked this (silly) question: ... [snip] I don't think the OP's original question silly. I think he or she wanted to know if LibréOffice's support for MS Office formats was compatible with those of MS Office's. A reasonable question, in my view. The poor guy or gal, rather than getting an answer to his or her question, instead ran into a buzz saw of anti-proprietary-formats sentiment, criticisms of Microsoft's behaviour and arguments about LO's implementation of non-standard standards. So, to answer the OP's original question (at least as I believe it to have meant): Kind of more-or-less. Probably more more than less :). I use the LibréOffice suite *exclusively*, and encounter few problems with the documents generated by my MS-Office-using colleagues. In fact: The only problem I've run into recently was attempting to export an MS Word document into PDF. LibréOffice Writer mangled the output. I had to resort to MS Office on my company laptop, booted into MS-Windows, accomplish the task. My experience is limited to .doc/.docx and .xls/.xlsx files. I do no PowerPoint (tho I did once do a presentation in LO's native presentation format), nor do I use the database application (Base). Is Draw able to read/write Visio files? Never even thought about that. I don't do much of that kind of thing, either. Regards, Jim My initial impression was the question was vague because there are several MSO formats especially when you included the ones deprecated by MS. I was not sure if original question was badly phrased out of ignorance or to troll. I could understand that many do not understand that MS has several MSO formats and a simple question could lead to it being misunderstood. Which formats are important to the user. I still must use MSO XP formats because many people I need to send spreadsheets are still using MSO XP not the newer formats. -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
nabbler wrote Please go to m$ and ask if m$office is compatible with the ODF standard of LO THAT is exactly the problem! There should never be an ODF standard of LO. If OASIS (the organization that defines the ODF standard) is not able to keep pace and improve on the document's definition to make it a valid open document standard, then the de facto standard will ALWAYS be the MS file formats... On the other hand if LO/TDF keeps improving and pushing the ODF format but OASIS does not publish the specifications, how can you expect any other office suite (including MS Office) to be compatible??? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101509.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 15/03/14 11:25, Pedro wrote: If OASIS (the organization that defines the ODF standard) is not able to keep pace and improve on the document's definition to make it a valid open document standard, then the de facto standard will ALWAYS be the MS file formats... ODF has a clear path forward, and is actively maintained by OASIS. There is an ODF 1.0 which is an ISO standard, and an ODF 1.2 which is in the process of becoming an ISO standard (backward compatible with ODF 1.0). Standard definitions, by their own nature, are moving slowly. This is the reason why LibreOffice is compatible with both ODF 1.0 and ODF 1.2. Microsoft OOXML, on the other hand, has never been implemented according to the standard ISO definition, and is not even actively maintained by ECMA (because ECMA is not focused on document standards as much as OASIS is). Unfortunately, in the market there are more OOXML documents than ODF documents, but this does not make OOXML format a standard. LibreOffice makes every possible effort to be interoperable with all Microsoft Office proprietary document formats, because this is what users are asking (so, the answer to the original question is YES). On the other hand, Microsoft makes every possible effort to make OOXML not interoperable, which means that maintaining compatibility is like trying to shoot a pheasant while driving a motorbike on a rough path with the eyes shut. -- Italo Vignoli - italo.vign...@gmail.com mob IT +39.348.5653829 - mob EU +39.392.7481795 sip it...@libreoffice.org - skype italovignoli GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 03:25:43 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: nabbler wrote Please go to m$ and ask if m$office is compatible with the ODF standard of LO THAT is exactly the problem! There should never be an ODF standard of LO. If OASIS (the organization that defines the ODF standard) is not able to keep pace and improve on the document's definition to make it a valid open document standard, then the de facto standard will ALWAYS be the MS file formats... On the other hand if LO/TDF keeps improving and pushing the ODF format but OASIS does not publish the specifications, how can you expect any other office suite (including MS Office) to be compatible??? -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101509.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. Has Urmas changed his username ? makes one wonder Pete . -- Linux 7-of-9 3.13.6-1-ARCH #1 SMP PREEMPT Fri Mar 7 22:47:48 CET 2014 x86_64 GNU/Linux -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 03:25:43 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: nabbler wrote Please go to m$ and ask if m$office is compatible with the ODF standard of LO THAT is exactly the problem! There should never be an ODF standard of LO. [snip] I read that as compatible with the ODF standard, as implemented in LO. I.e.: LO uses the ODF standard. Does MS Office? Did I read that wrong? Or does LO not properly implement the ODF standard? Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Hi Jim, all Jim Seymour wrote I read that as compatible with the ODF standard, as implemented in LO. I.e.: LO uses the ODF standard. Does MS Office? Did I read that wrong? Or does LO not properly implement the ODF standard? As Italo mentioned LO is backwards compatible with all ODF specifications. But since LO is pushing the ODF file format, the current LO implementation is more advanced than the current approved OASIS standard (e.g. LO supports font embedding) So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :) Hope this makes it clear ;) -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101566.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 08:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jim, all Jim Seymour wrote I read that as compatible with the ODF standard, as implemented in LO. I.e.: LO uses the ODF standard. Does MS Office? Did I read that wrong? Or does LO not properly implement the ODF standard? As Italo mentioned LO is backwards compatible with all ODF specifications. But since LO is pushing the ODF file format, the current LO implementation is more advanced than the current approved OASIS standard (e.g. LO supports font embedding) No offense intended, but that's weasel-word way of saying LO is non-standard. So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :) OASIS establishes the standards, no? If such is the case: What you've written, above, is what we call putting the cart before the horse. And that's putting the best possible light on it. To be clear: I have no problem with LO implementing non-standard behaviour, but that behaviour *must* be optional, with the switches that enable it clearly noted as such. Hope this makes it clear ;) Disappointingly so, if I understood correctly what you wrote, and if what you wrote is accurate. But perhaps I've misunderstood? In which case: Disregard my criticisms. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Hi Jim, On 3/15/2014 4:58 PM, Jim Seymour wrote: ... As Italo mentioned LO is backwards compatible with all ODF specifications. But since LO is pushing the ODF file format, the current LO implementation is more advanced than the current approved OASIS standard (e.g. LO supports font embedding) No offense intended, but that's weasel-word way of saying LO is non-standard. Maybe it is just a layman stating what he thinks LO is doing. My understanding as a normal/basic user of LO is that it supports the different ODF standards which exist, some of them approved by OASIS and others not yet approved. E.g. in writer you can select the ODF version standard in Options/Load/Save/General see also: https://help.libreoffice.org/swriter/cui/ui/optsavepage/odfversion?Language=en-USSystem=WINVersion=4.2#bm_id810266 Werner -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Jim Seymour wrote No offense intended, but that's weasel-word way of saying LO is non-standard. I can't figure out how calling someone a weasel can be *not* offensive... I'm not affiliated to TDF/LO so this is just my opinion and I don't have any advantage in convincing anyone to use LO/ODF and therefore no need to weasel-word anyone. You have options to save in ODF 1.0, 1.1 and 1.2 (according to OASIS standards) By default LO is set to save in ODF 1.2 (extended) which means that yes, TDF/LO is putting the cart before the horse. Personally, I'm glad it does. Regards, Pedro -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101581.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Hi :) E-letter's post was somewhat confusing. ODF 1.2 is used by many programs and suites and is implemented almost identically in all of them. You can even post bug-reports in the various programs and suites if you do find any difference between implementation and written specification. Errr, except that posting bug-reports against MS products is not so easy. LibreOffice does use the ODF 1.2 and that did become an ISO standard a couple of years ago. I'm sure we celebrated it on this mailing list. It's the ODF 1.2 (extended) that is still being developed by OASIS and is not yet an ISO standard. Apparently that is part of the new standard, presumably due to be called the 1.3 when it gets far enough in it's development process. OASIS is an organisation made from representatives from several hundred different organisations. Each organisation involved is limited to only having fair representation equal to all other organisations involved. So, no single organisation can have too much power or control over OASIS. It's not the type of organisation that allows a single company's reps to become chair-persons of several sub-committees and/or then manipulate meetings to push their own agenda through! Files using a newer version of ODF can be successfully opened in programs and suites that only use the older versions of the standard but will just be missing some of the functionality. Files using an older version of ODF can open just fine in programs and suites using the newer standard. So it's very different from MS's OOXML (such as DocX, XlsX, PptX etc) in both directions! This is another reason why ODF is already rapidly increasing in popularity for longer-term storage of documents. If you go to Tools - Options - Save/Load Then you will see you can change the default format down from ODF 1.2 (extended) to ODF 1.2 or ODF 1.1/1.0 You can also choose to set the default format to MS formats although we generally recommend agaisnt doing that. If you do go for it then please use the older MS format because it's more stable across a wider range of programs and suites whereas OOXML can sometimes be fussy about which version of MS Office it needs to be viewed in. However, as e-letter pointed out, the problems of incompatibility are almost entirely due to MS's apparent inability to implement their own or anyone else's formats. All other suites and programs can happily share files with each other in almost any format. Regards from Tom :) On 15 March 2014 15:58, Jim Seymour jseym...@linxnet.com wrote: On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 08:32:27 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Hi Jim, all Jim Seymour wrote I read that as compatible with the ODF standard, as implemented in LO. I.e.: LO uses the ODF standard. Does MS Office? Did I read that wrong? Or does LO not properly implement the ODF standard? As Italo mentioned LO is backwards compatible with all ODF specifications. But since LO is pushing the ODF file format, the current LO implementation is more advanced than the current approved OASIS standard (e.g. LO supports font embedding) No offense intended, but that's weasel-word way of saying LO is non-standard. So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :) OASIS establishes the standards, no? If such is the case: What you've written, above, is what we call putting the cart before the horse. And that's putting the best possible light on it. To be clear: I have no problem with LO implementing non-standard behaviour, but that behaviour *must* be optional, with the switches that enable it clearly noted as such. Hope this makes it clear ;) Disappointingly so, if I understood correctly what you wrote, and if what you wrote is accurate. But perhaps I've misunderstood? In which case: Disregard my criticisms. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 17:12:51 +0100 Werner werner...@gmx.ch wrote: Hi Jim, [snip] My understanding as a normal/basic user of LO is that it supports the different ODF standards which exist, some of them approved by OASIS and others not yet approved. E.g. in writer you can select the ODF version standard in Options/Load/Save/General see also: https://help.libreoffice.org/swriter/cui/ui/optsavepage/odfversion?Language=en-USSystem=WINVersion=4.2#bm_id810266 One would hope the standard behaviour is to write things in the officially standard way. Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On Sat, 15 Mar 2014 09:24:17 -0700 (PDT) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: Jim Seymour wrote No offense intended, but that's weasel-word way of saying LO is non-standard. I can't figure out how calling someone a weasel can be *not* offensive... [snip] My apologies. Bad choice of terms on an international mailing list :( Using weasel words does not one a weasel make :). It describes a use of language, or phraseology, not the individual. Better phrasing would have been that's just another way of saying... Tho I suppose one who habitually employs weasel-wording might reasonably be suspected of being a weasel :) Regards, Jim -- Note: My mail server employs *very* aggressive anti-spam filtering. If you reply to this email and your email is rejected, please accept my apologies and let me know via my web form at http://jimsun.LinxNet.com/contact/scform.php. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
On 15/03/14 16:58, Jim Seymour wrote: To be clear: I have no problem with LO implementing non-standard behaviour, but that behaviour *must* be optional, with the switches that enable it clearly noted as such. You can select the default ODF document format from the Options menu. You can choose between ODF 1.0/1.1, ODF 1.2 (this is the standard ODF 1.2 implementation), ODF 1.2 Extended Compatibility Mode, and ODF 1.2 Extended with LibreOffice Additional Format Related Features. LibreOffice is the reference ODF implementation, and as such is fully supporting the document standard, and provides compatibility options. -- Italo Vignoli - italo.vign...@gmail.com mob IT +39.348.5653829 - mob EU +39.392.7481795 sip it...@libreoffice.org - skype italovignoli GPG Key ID - 0xAAB8D5C0 DB75 1534 3FD0 EA5F 56B5 FDA6 DE82 934C AAB8 D5C0 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
In data sabato 15 marzo 2014 13:34:01, pete nikolic ha scritto: Has Urmas changed his username ? makes one wonder I think so. In fact, its address is inpost(or)@gmail.com The debunker is back. -- Valter Open Source is better! LibreOffice: www.libreoffice.org KDE: www.kde.org Kubuntu: www.kubuntu.org -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: LO compatibility
Jim Seymour wrote Pedro wrote: So it's not a case that LO is not implementing the existing ODF standards but that it is already improving on them (in an open manner, unlike MS XML). So OASIS has to catch up :) OASIS establishes the standards, no? If such is the case: What you've written, above, is what we call putting the cart before the horse. And that's putting the best possible light on it. This is not how the ODF standard is developed. As Italo has indicated it happens slowly over a long time, and there are various reasons for this. There is a statement on the OASIS website (which unfortunately I cannot find at present) which indicates that in order for a new feature to be included in ODF-Next by OASIS, it must first be implemented in a few different pieces of software e.g., Apache OO, LO, and AbiWord (2+ or 3+ implementations from memory). ODF needs to be practical (based on real-world use cases) and community-driven rather than a theoretical specification developed in isolation by a chosen few. TomD wrote LibreOffice does use the ODF 1.2 and that did become an ISO standard a couple of years ago. No. The information provided by Italo up-thread is correct: italovignoli wrote ... ODF 1.2 which is in the process of becoming an ISO standard (backward compatible with ODF 1.0). Standard definitions, by their own nature, are moving slowly. Details on milestones in the ISO/IEC approval process here http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_standardization#OpenDocument_1.2 . Best wishes, Owen. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Re-LO-compatibility-tp4101492p4101650.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscr...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
