e Microsoft even called the document type the Microsoft
Office Open XML format.
I expect they parse it as: Microsoft Office Open XML format.
It looks like yet another strategy to confuse people into getting the
right open office thing from MS Office and put the incompatibility
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I expect they parse it as: Microsoft Office Open XML format.
It looks like yet another strategy to confuse people into getting the
right open office thing from MS Office and put the incompatibility
blame on the others :)
That cuts both ways, and since they have
This one was sent on dev:
an MS XML developer's blog:
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2005/06/01/424085.aspx
JC
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It covers practically everything you do with data on a computer, right from
the earliest stored procedure Eniac/whathaveyou right up to the most minimal
CE or embedded piece of code that runs your morning wake up radio or beeps at
you from your wristwatch.
Do a google on (fraudulent
I've just found this site:
http://borel.slu.edu/gramadoir/index.html
http://borel.slu.edu/gramadoir/eagar.html
It looks as if it may need localization - at the moment it's only got Gaelic
(Irish) supported.
Wesley Parish
--
Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish
-
Mau
Dnia czwartek, 2 czerwca 2005 09:01, Daniel Carrera napisa:
Depends on the license. Never doubt Microsoft's willingness to spin the
word open to make it look like they're playing fair while still
locking out competitors. Sadly, the state of Massachusetts gave them
some fuel to make that claim
One problem is the junk patent which is far too vague and covers obvious
developments and covers prior art. Two perl modules come to mind right
off Storeable and Data::Dumper;, I'm sure there are other serialization
modules in C libraries or even Pascal if one wants examples going back to
the
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 20:12 -0700, Mike White wrote:
Probably, but you would have to challenge it in court to make it stick.
Which is a major problem because the expense of doing that eliminates
the majority of SMEs from ever even thinking about it. Even Local
Education Authorities with 100
Hi,
Mathias Bauer schrieb:
As an example for the second approach, we have some objects that offer
an API like:
n = MyObject.getPropertyValue( PropName )
Basic can automatically inspect this object and allows you to write
n = MyObject.PropName
Do we have an overview which simplifications
Ian Laurenson wrote:
oSearchDescriptor = thisComponent.createSearchDescriptor
oSearchDescriptor.setSearchString(the)
oFirstSelection = _
thisComponent.getcurrentController.getSelection.getByIndex(0)
oFound = thisComponent.findNext(oFirstSelection, oSearchDescriptor)
As FindNext is only
Ian Laurenson wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-01 at 10:06, Mathias Bauer wrote:
Ian Laurenson wrote:
* In Writer searching is at a document level thus coding for searching
within a selection is extremely tedious and the resulting code is slow.
Interesting, can you provide an example that shows the
Robert Horvat wrote:
I am sorry if you do not understand my bad English. My native language is
Slovene, but i presume you do not speak Slovene, so...
Please look down
Lep pozdrav,
Robert Horvat, dr.vet.med.
+386-41-558-349
http://www.veterina.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
-Original
Daniel Rentz wrote:
Hi,
Mathias Bauer schrieb:
As an example for the second approach, we have some objects that offer
an API like:
n = MyObject.getPropertyValue( PropName )
Basic can automatically inspect this object and allows you to write
n = MyObject.PropName
Do we have an
Daniel Carrera wrote:
Jamie Borg wrote:
Does this new announcement mean anything for OOo.org developers able
actually use the microsoft XML documentation to develop a 'lossless'
conversion?
Depends on the license. Never doubt Microsoft's willingness to spin the
word open to make it look
Hello everyone,
This is to announce the immediate release of the Scottish Gaelic version of
OpenOffice.org 1.1.1 into the community.
Install files for Microsoft Windows are contained in the archive:
OOo_1.1.1_Gaelic.zip
Install files for Linux are contained in the archive:
Well, I haven't figured out how to reply from the digest with
Thunderbird yet, so this is a copy/paste.
5. Context menus in tables should offer many (all) table-specific
operations. This could be fine-tuned to adjust to how the table is
selected (cell, row,...)
They do. Which ones are you
Hi,
Mathias Bauer schrieb:
Daniel Rentz wrote:
Do we have an overview which simplifications are provided by OOBasic?
Sure we have. But I assume you wanted to ask if this information is
available in public. :-)
Right :-)
I'm not sure, I have to find out.
Thanks.
Regards
Daniel
Robin Laing wrote:
If you want a good idea of how Microsoft views Open formats, look at
their response to the idea of including OASIS filters in Word. The
details are on the OASIS web site.
http://www.oasis-open.org/home/index.php
Basically they don't want to support OASIS but have people
http://www.informationweek.com/story/showArticle.jhtml?articleID=163702927
quote
We've used the same binary file formats from Office 97 through Office
2003, says Chris Capossela, a corporate VP in Microsoft's information
worker group.
/quote
Told ya the files were the same from 97-today...
--
On 6/1/05, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not true. The *sender* of the mail specifies the line length. If
you wrap your lines at 72 characters every receiving client will display
them in lines with 72 characters.
Not if you get *descent* mail client. Every mail client I've
Chad Smith wrote:
quote
We've used the same binary file formats from Office 97 through Office
2003, says Chris Capossela, a corporate VP in Microsoft's information
worker group.
/quote
Told ya the files were the same from 97-today...
Everyone knows that Microsoft *claims* that the format
Chad Smith wrote:
On 6/1/05, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not true. The *sender* of the mail specifies the line length. If
you wrap your lines at 72 characters every receiving client will display
them in lines with 72 characters.
Not if you get *descent* mail client.
Hi Chad,
Chad Smith wrote:
On 6/1/05, Mathias Bauer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That's not true. The *sender* of the mail specifies the line length. If
you wrap your lines at 72 characters every receiving client will display
them in lines with 72 characters.
Not if you get *descent* mail
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Mozilla/TB and others indeed wrap long lines (as you said correctly),
but at least TB doesn't do that in the editor when you reply, thus
the question (you might call it a complaint) from Peter.
In TB:
Edit--rewrap
This will re-wrap to lines in the editor, keeping
On Thu, 2005-06-02 at 21:20, Mathias Bauer wrote:
[snipped comments about Searching in Writer and PageLayout enumeration]
Thanks Mathias for offering to look into these areas.
A much higher priority for me is having more in the API such as the
ability to easily have docked/floating
Hello,
I am an active user of OpenOffice and I just upgraded to your new version
and it is much better than the older one. I was messing around and I found
a bug that you might want to fix that has to do with OpenOffice opening
word documents. The bug is that if you create page numbers in
Hello,
there's a link to a case study on the German Ooo-Pages
(http://de.openoffice.org/product/docs/skilldeal.sxw and
http://de.openoffice.org/product/docs/skilldeal.pdf) explaining the
advantages of Ooo.
These documents contain a lot of errors regarding ortography, and
punctuation. I
I'm preparing a Newsforge article about swapping files between OOo
Writer and MS Word. I'll be doing my own experiments, but I'd be
interested in other people's experiences. What works for people sharing
documents between the two programs, and what doesn't?
When you answer, please mention what
I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
can actually see what it's called.
The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
*do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without
prompt to the user) and you want to see the actual
I know most of you will think this idea is lame and far fetched and I'm
just a wishful thinker.
Would it be possible that we, as a group with all our collective
backgrounds in software development, could actually gather enough
irrefutable evidence so that it might be presented to a judge to
Chad Smith wrote:
I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You
can actually see what it's called.
The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you
*do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without
prompt to the user) and you want to see
Peter Reaper wrote:
Peter Kupfer OOo on 01.06.2005 4:29 wrote:
Peter Reaper wrote:
Joseph Roth on 31.05.2005 15:54 wrote:
Peter Reaper wrote:
Some things that still bug me about OpenOffice:
1. The page ZOOM toolbar button needs to be a dropdown selection,
instead of the more cumbersome
as long as the foundation of the file format remains the same they can say
they've used the same format. That's Rich Text Format. It changed names, but
that doesn't mean the under-lieing technology is different.
The Microsoft Document Format, still relies on OLE and TTF standards. Just
like
Shoshannah Forbes wrote:
Mathias Bauer wrote:
Mozilla/TB and others indeed wrap long lines (as you said correctly),
but at least TB doesn't do that in the editor when you reply, thus
the question (you might call it a complaint) from Peter.
In TB:
Edit--rewrap
This will re-wrap to lines
From XML.org daily newslink:
Possible Prior Art for Microsoft XML Patent Found
Ingrid Marson, ZDNet News UK
The row over Microsoft's XML patent has taken another twist with the
discovery of an open source application on Sourceforge for converting
C++ programming objects into XML files that
35 matches
Mail list logo
