Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
On 07/21/2011 09:43 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote: On 21/07/2011 14:23, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: I am of the opinion that good inter-operability with MSO products makes it easier to attract new users and that poor inter-operability with MSO products makes it more difficult. I quite ag

RE: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
Yes, don't confuse ODF compatibility with OpenOffice.org (or LibreOffice) compatibility. I was in the room on one occasion when Microsoft was asking for advice on their approach to ODF 1.1 Spreadsheet documents. Unfortunately, none of us blinked about how this would work for users who are un

RE: [tdf-discuss] disclaimer for extension website

2011-07-21 Thread Dennis E. Hamilton
I think the DMCA guff is avoidable as long as your extension site is not in the United States. Mirrors will have to be careful too, though. - Dennis -Original Message- From: Florian Effenberger [mailto:flo...@documentfoundation.org] Sent: Thursday, July 21, 2011 01:32 To: discuss@docu

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Timothy Mark Brennan Jr.
Since there is still a lot of prejudice out there against open source software based on FUD and plain old not wanting to leave the comfort zone, ease of interoperability with M$ document formats will be necessary. In fact I view it as a way of showing a superior attitude. Interoperability is som

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker
On 21/07/2011 14:23, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: I am of the opinion that good inter-operability with MSO products makes it easier to attract new users and that poor inter-operability with MSO products makes it more difficult. Interestingly, I've just received an MSO .doc document. I opened

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker
On 21/07/2011 14:23, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: I am of the opinion that good inter-operability with MSO products makes it easier to attract new users and that poor inter-operability with MSO products makes it more difficult. I quite agree. As (I would say) between 90 and 95% of the busin

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Andrew Douglas Pitonyak
On 07/21/2011 08:47 AM, e-letter wrote: On 21/07/2011, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote I am more comfortable in OOo than I am in MSO, so, I have created many MSO deliverables in OOo and LO. The only time that I make an exception is when I believe that I am not able to seamlessly move between form

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread e-letter
On 21/07/2011, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: > > I might also conclude that there is NO reason to support any other file > format either. I mean, really, why should I support a non-ODF format? > PDF generation? Remove it! Any other office file format? Remove it! Why > single out file formats asso

Re: [tdf-discuss] "Post a bug" also on download page (easier to use)

2011-07-21 Thread Rainer Bielefeld
Carlo Strata schrieb: in Italian Libre lists we have discussed the hypothesis to add a quick couple of links ("how to post a bug" and "post a bug") Hi, please also see "Bug 35855 - Usability: Add menu item with link to Bug tracking system" a

Re: [tdf-discuss] "Post a bug" also on download page (easier to use)

2011-07-21 Thread Carlo Strata
Hi Charles and Richard, I have already post this suggest on the website mailing list, but with a longer and less communicative object that is: "[libreoffice-website] Just an hint to spread the ideas in normal users that they can post a bug and that they can easily do it" and is also on [libre

[tdf-discuss] disclaimer for extension website

2011-07-21 Thread Florian Effenberger
Hello, I'd like to quote my colleague Thorsten Behrens on this: == With the upcoming extension website, we'll need some kind of click-through license agreement, for someone submitting software, and a disclaimer on the front page, refusing liability on third-party-provided software that we host.

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker
On 21/07/2011 01:33, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote: On 07/20/2011 05:02 PM, e-letter wrote: On the users mailing list, a significant proportion of a random view of questions seems to be with relation to using LO is some way with m$ document formats. What should be the priority of LO development

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker
On 20/07/2011 23:54, Robert Derman wrote: If you want to know about one very good reason for not using M$ Google Ball Guitar String Co. Excellent article. Thanks for that... -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/

Re: [tdf-discuss] ignore m$ legacy?

2011-07-21 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker
On 20/07/2011 22:34, Andrea Pescetti wrote: But, in almost all cases I've seen, the reasons were different, like getting rid of dependency on a specific vendor, I would also guess that one of the other main reasons would be to avoid the antics of the Business Software Alliance and it's confede