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

On 1/2/2011 6:34 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/3/11 1:12 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

ODF support is built in since MS Office 2007 SP2 for Windows. MS Office for MacOS does not support
ODF, and there is not a plugin availble. The older version of MS Office do not support ODF, but
there is a plugin available.

We all know that Microsoft is trying to slow down ANY standard format, because format lock in is a
long time strategy.

I do not know if you are familiar with Gandhi statement: First they ignore you, then they laugh
at you, then they fight you, then you win.

This is exactly what is happening for office suites.

Gandhi won over the British empire being respectful of law and being an advocate of freedom. I do
not have his moral strength, but I do follow his lesson.

Very nice, Italo, and thanks for the information about ODF support in Office. We seem to be at then
they fight you so it's looking good!

Unfortunately, this means that most user-created documents going to those with more recent versions
of Office will be handled by the MS ODF, which is especially unfortunate for spreadsheets. If we get
a complaint about compatibility, we can (as usual) recommend using PDF if possible. But if not,
which is the better choice -- XP or OOXML? Unless I can be fairly sure OOXML will be more
satisfactory, I'll still recommend XP. But I'm willing to be convinced to recommend (very
reluctantly) OOXML. Is there any way to assess this, or will we just have to wait and see?

--
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

2011-01-03 Thread Italo Vignoli


On 1/3/11 8:43 AM, Johannes A. Bodwing wrote:


What's the background (for ESC) to decide what leads to the best
software for users?


I apologize for repeating myself, but the ESC will decide upon positive 
contributions, suggestions or requests. You suggest a feature, promote a 
technology, contribute a new export filter.


It does not make any sense to take a decision in order to bash a single 
company. We are in the market to promote free software and good ethics 
in a positive way.


Most office suite users are looking for software able to create and 
manage documents. They are looking for positive answers.



Or is it just a lack of communication?


I do not think it is a lack of communication. It is a different agenda: 
TDS's is FOR free software, other people's one is AGAINST Microsoft.


Bashing Microsoft in the name of ethics is a total nonsense. Ethics is a 
positive concept, and cannot be used to justify any negative action 
whatsoever.


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

2011-01-03 Thread Italo Vignoli


On 1/3/11 3:40 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:


Unfortunately, this means that most user-created documents going to
those with more recent versions of Office will be handled by the MS ODF,
which is especially unfortunate for spreadsheets. If we get a complaint
about compatibility, we can (as usual) recommend using PDF if possible.
But if not, which is the better choice -- XP or OOXML? Unless I can be
fairly sure OOXML will be more satisfactory, I'll still recommend XP.
But I'm willing to be convinced to recommend (very reluctantly) OOXML.
Is there any way to assess this, or will we just have to wait and see?


I know is a pain, but is really a case by case issue.

--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

On 1/3/2011 4:55 AM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:

snip
It may be that without explicity aiming to remove users from our sister, OOo,
aiming to take
the other 20% who do not use MSO 07 (plus those who do!) may be a more
effective way to
spread the file format. If we can get ODT used enough - through users choosing
to overlook
docx output - many MSO users may find it helpful to have LibO (or OOo)
installed also. At
some point they will wonder why they keep paying for MSO.

Unfortunately, those MSO users can easily remain unaware of the value of OOo/LibO (and other ODF
applications), because since Office 2007 SP2, Office (on Windows, with no plugins) will read and
write ODF formats. If one of these MSO users gets an ODF document from a non-MSO application, it
will open. If they don't notice compatibility problems, they will have no reason to investigate. In
many cases, though, especially with spreadsheets, there will be obvious problems. So who will get
the blame -- MSO, or the other application? Will they be likely to install the non-MSO application,
even though it's free? Will the non-MSO application user continue to use ODF, or switch to exporting
XP or OOXML formats to maintain interoperability? (Out of self-preservation, they really need to do
that; it's not clear at the moment which of these formats will be better for interoperability.)

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


On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote:

Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
[...]


inconsistencies. However, it's fortunately or unfortunately, should not be a
problem: OOo  LibO implement the existing and used version of MS
*proprietary formats* used in MS Office 2007 and 2010 that are called OOXML.
They're not exactly the ISO standard, far from that; feel free to call them
transitional if you wish, but it's very much of a grey area and I just call
them MS propietary formats. So what LibO does is to offer convenience to its

This is the point. MS Office 2007 and 2010 doesn't implement ISO/IEC
29300 also called OOXML.

Please change the subject because it's completely messing. Call simply
MS XML proprietary formats.

Davide


They don't implement the Strict version -- but I think we'd have a hard time arguing that they 
don't implement the Transitional version that must also be considered standard, it's documented in 
that specification, and MS wrote it to cover themselves. If we called these formats proprietary, we 
could get into real trouble.


--
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


On 1/3/2011 10:26 AM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/3/11 3:40 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:


Unfortunately, this means that most user-created documents going to
those with more recent versions of Office will be handled by the MS ODF,
which is especially unfortunate for spreadsheets. If we get a complaint
about compatibility, we can (as usual) recommend using PDF if possible.
But if not, which is the better choice -- XP or OOXML? Unless I can be
fairly sure OOXML will be more satisfactory, I'll still recommend XP.
But I'm willing to be convinced to recommend (very reluctantly) OOXML.
Is there any way to assess this, or will we just have to wait and see?


I know is a pain, but is really a case by case issue.


There's some very encouraging information elsewhere in this thread about test documents that already 
exist for this. I think we may have a plan going soon!


--
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

2011-01-03 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Barbara,

Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:55:21 -0600,
Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com a écrit :

 On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote:
  Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
  [...]
 
  inconsistencies. However, it's fortunately or unfortunately,
  should not be a problem: OOo  LibO implement the existing and
  used version of MS *proprietary formats* used in MS Office 2007
  and 2010 that are called OOXML. They're not exactly the ISO
  standard, far from that; feel free to call them transitional if
  you wish, but it's very much of a grey area and I just call them
  MS propietary formats. So what LibO does is to offer convenience
  to its
  This is the point. MS Office 2007 and 2010 doesn't implement ISO/IEC
  29300 also called OOXML.
 
  Please change the subject because it's completely messing. Call
  simply MS XML proprietary formats.
 
  Davide
 
 They don't implement the Strict version -- but I think we'd have a
 hard time arguing that they don't implement the Transitional
 version that must also be considered standard, it's documented in
 that specification, and MS wrote it to cover themselves. If we called
 these formats proprietary, we could get into real trouble.
 

Well, the problem is that it's not that documented. Really,
Transitional OOXML was an honourable way out for MS at the ISO's JTC 1.

Basically the deal was that the strict OOXML was rumoured to be clean
(although I don't think it is and I'm not the only one) while the
transitional was offering more features and was more in line with the
existing and used formats used by MS Office 2007 and 2010. At this
stage we have no evidence that the transitional OOXML and the formats
used in MS office suites match, and I'm not even saying this out of bad
will against MS: it's a really important question. 

best,

-- 
Charles-H. Schulz
Membre du Comité exécutif
The Document Foundation.

-- 
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

2011-01-03 Thread Johannes A. Bodwing


Hi Italo,

On 1/3/11 8:43 AM, Johannes A. Bodwing wrote:


What's the background (for ESC) to decide what leads to the best
software for users?


I apologize for repeating myself, but the ESC will decide upon 
positive contributions, suggestions or requests. You suggest a 
feature, promote a technology, contribute a new export filter.

...

What I mean now with a real example.
What if I would propose to transform the startcenter into a individual 
desktop with drop and drag like the former integrated desktop of 
StarOffice. And I would also propose to make it choosable for users:

~ to have it in the LO-window like now the startcenter
~ to dock it like toolbars (perhaps with a constant distance from the 
dokument-window)
~ to use it like an external container of individual folders, files 
and links.


How would someone decide whether it were a positiv feature for LO or not?
Because no one has a crystall ball to look into the future. And it could 
be, that such a proposal is denied by LO but ten months later another 
producer of an office-suit succeeds with just such a feature.


And if it were denied, is it lost than till somebody others makes the 
same proposal years later. Or is there a system to save proposals for a 
later check under new conditions.


That's my problem with the decisions.
But it hasn't to be answered right now. I'll ask such things after the 
3.3-release again.


Greetings,
Johannes



--
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

2011-01-03 Thread Cor Nouws


Hello Johannes,

Johannes A. Bodwing wrote (03-01-11 20:31)

Hi Cor,

...



Or is there a system to save proposals for a later check under new
conditions.


Not that I am aware of.


Eventually it could be helfpul to have a list of such ideas in a common
place (TDF or LO) with marks like:
later on - not practicable - and so on and with short reasons.
Because people could check such a list and see whether an idea was
already in discussion and what the decision was, even why.
This could prevent that the same proposals come again and again, or
reduce that.
And a workflow could be:
You have an idea?
First look at the List ...
If your idea is not mentioned, mail it for discussion ...

Perhaps developers and others could spare some time by that.


Definitely a good idea. A must have somewhere on our wiki or site.
 ( AFAIK we do not have it yet.
   I always think of the wiki, rather than the website,
   because the content might be more subject to changes and of
   course on the wiki more can help  )

But did you have a look at (I myself do it just now..) 
http://www.libreoffice.org/get-involved/ ?

Maybe your idea is a logic addition for that section?


That's my problem with the decisions.


That many things are not clear, just because of the nature of a
FLOSS-community?
I think I do not understand what kind of clarity or confirmation you
are looking for.


In comparison with the real members here I'm from outer space ;-)


Be aware - might change suddenly ;-)


I have to put many things together like a puzzle to get an overview for
myself.


Don't think that any of us has a complete overview. But of course, the 
longer you are somewhere, the easier to find your way.



But it hasn't to be answered right now. I'll ask such things after the
3.3-release again.


And maybe too after the version after that?


That's the reason why I ask such odd questions ;-)


(BTW: 3.3 release is not fixed. In this specific case, it will be no
earlier then the OpenOffice.org 3.3.0 release of course.)


Is this a good plan from a psychological point of view?
Because people out of TDF/LO and OOo are waiting for the 3.3, and now:
OOo is personally weaked; some sites write it like is OOo at the end?
LO is almost unknown for many potenzial users and has to prove that its
new system of Open Office Suite works well.
Is it good in this situation to come as the second? Eventually weeks after?
In a race between two usually the second is the loser.


That is one side of the subject.
On the other hand, LibO 3.3.0 will be based on OpenOffice.org 3.3.0. 
Thus it is not easy to release at the same moment or even earlier.
Even more so, since quite some developments started to at the LibO side, 
and changes from Novell and others have been integrated, I would not be 
surprised if we, especially since all is relatively very new, need more 
time for our final QA.

And since I am very good in predicting the past, don't ask me ;-)

Regards,
Cor

--
 - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -


--
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

On 1/3/2011 11:19 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:

Barbara,

Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:55:21 -0600,
Barbara Dupreyb...@onr.com a écrit :

On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote:

Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
[...]

inconsistencies. However, it's fortunately or unfortunately,
should not be a problem: OOo LibO implement the existing and
used version of MS *proprietary formats* used in MS Office 2007
and 2010 that are called OOXML. They're not exactly the ISO
standard, far from that; feel free to call them transitional if
you wish, but it's very much of a grey area and I just call them
MS propietary formats. So what LibO does is to offer convenience
to its

This is the point. MS Office 2007 and 2010 doesn't implement ISO/IEC
29300 also called OOXML.

Please change the subject because it's completely messing. Call
simply MS XML proprietary formats.

Davide

They don't implement the Strict version -- but I think we'd have a
hard time arguing that they don't implement the Transitional
version that must also be considered standard, it's documented in
that specification, and MS wrote it to cover themselves. If we called
these formats proprietary, we could get into real trouble.

Well, the problem is that it's not that documented. Really,
Transitional OOXML was an honourable way out for MS at the ISO's JTC 1.

Basically the deal was that the strict OOXML was rumoured to be clean
(although I don't think it is and I'm not the only one) while the
transitional was offering more features and was more in line with the
existing and used formats used by MS Office 2007 and 2010. At this
stage we have no evidence that the transitional OOXML and the formats
used in MS office suites match, and I'm not even saying this out of bad
will against MS: it's a really important question.

best,

Thanks! Very interesting. It still doesn't seem safe to call these proprietary formats, though,
even though the standard's documentation is seriously flawed. Not sure I buy that honourable way
out part -- pragmatic, yes, face-saving, yes, but honorable? I'd have a hard time applying that term
to what happened there! I really feel for you guys who were in the thick of it, trying to stop the
juggernaut that was rolling over the process.

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

2011-01-03 Thread BRM

- Original Message 

 From: Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com
 On 1/3/2011 11:19 AM, Charles-H. Schulz wrote:
  Barbara,
 
   Le Mon, 03 Jan 2011 10:55:21 -0600,
  Barbara Dupreyb...@onr.com  a écrit  :
 
  On 1/3/2011 3:06 AM, Davide Dozza wrote:
   Il 02/01/2011 20:41, Charles-H. Schulz ha scritto:
   [...]
 
  inconsistencies. However, it's  fortunately or unfortunately,
  should not be a problem:  OOo   LibO implement the existing and
  used version  of MS *proprietary formats* used in MS Office 2007
  and 2010  that are called OOXML. They're not exactly the ISO
  standard,  far from that; feel free to call them transitional if
  you  wish, but it's very much of a grey area and I just call them
   MS propietary formats. So what LibO does is to offer  convenience
  to its
  This is the point. MS  Office 2007 and 2010 doesn't implement ISO/IEC
  29300 also called  OOXML.
 
  Please change the subject because it's  completely messing. Call
  simply MS XML proprietary  formats.
 
  Davide
  They don't implement  the Strict version -- but I think we'd have a
  hard time arguing  that they don't implement the Transitional
  version that must also  be considered standard, it's documented in
  that specification, and  MS wrote it to cover themselves. If we called
  these formats  proprietary, we could get into real trouble.
 
  Well, the  problem is that it's not that documented. Really,
  Transitional OOXML was  an honourable way out for MS at the ISO's JTC 1.
 
  Basically the  deal was that the strict OOXML was rumoured to be clean
  (although I  don't think it is and I'm not the only one) while the
  transitional was  offering more features and was more in line with the
  existing and used  formats used by MS Office 2007 and 2010. At this
  stage we have no  evidence that the transitional OOXML and the formats
  used in MS office  suites match, and I'm not even saying this out of bad
  will against MS:  it's a really important question.
 
  best,
 
 Thanks! Very  interesting. It still doesn't seem safe to call these 
proprietary formats,  though, 

 even though the standard's documentation is seriously flawed. Not  sure I buy 
that honourable way 

 out part -- pragmatic, yes, face-saving,  yes, but honorable? I'd have a hard 
time applying that term 

 to what happened  there! I really feel for you guys who were in the thick of 
it, trying to stop  the 

 juggernaut that was rolling over the process.
 

While I do agree per your honourable comment...

OOXML in any form[1] is certainly not standard, nor is it open.
So what _would_ you call it if you were not going to call it what it really is 
(proprietary)?

Honestly, we shouldn't be trying to be politically correct, but rather honest, 
if not bluntly so.

Call out Microsoft on their lack of following even their own standard; it'll 
have a greater impact as the community rallies behind that instead of trying to 
be politically correct and let them get away with doing what they've done.

A goose by any other name is still a goose.

Ben

[1] Even Microsoft makes no qualms about not following ISO OOXML or even  
giving 
you options so that you know you are writing ISO OOXML -  transitional or 
strict.

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Olivier Hallot


Hi

Em 01-01-2011 18:58, Sveinn í Felli escreveu:

Þann lau  1.jan 2011 19:57, skrifaði NoOp:

On 12/31/2010 02:18 AM, Sveinn í Felli wrote:


(snip)


I'm more interested in something like the mso2ooo:
http://leapon.net/en/mso2ooo-batch-convert-microsoft-office-documents-openoffice-documents



(snip)



Best,

Sveinn



LibreOffice and OpenOffice already have a batch file format converter as 
a wizzard since relase 1 . Any hint on where this one is better or worse 
than the native one?


Regards

--
Olivier Hallot
Founder, Steering Commitee Member - The Document Foundation
Voicing the enterprise
Translation Leader for Brazilian Portuguese

--
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

2011-01-02 Thread Zaphod Feeblejocks


 Supporting OOXML Strict today would make LO not compatible with MS 
 Office, and users do want interoperability and not just standard compliance.
 

Anyone remember Netscape?

It supported the W3C standards, Internet Explorer did not.  But, MS, through 
Frontpage etc., 
flooded the market with non-standard HTML.  To the user, it appeared that 
Netscape was 
broken.

As a few people have said, reading .docx (in whichever version) is needed.  
Else, LibO 
appears to be broken.

However, which version would we write to?  There is not even a 100% guarantee 
that Word 
2014 will support the ISO version of OOXML.  Maybe it will support Word 2010's 
version. 
Maybe it will be slightly different (again).  Sounds like trying to hit a 
moving target.

If Word had full ODT import (and hence, complied with at least one ISO 
standard), this 
would not be an issue.

I'm glad I'm not making the decision!

zf

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Sveinn í Felli


Þann sun  2.jan 2011 10:03, skrifaði Olivier Hallot:

Hi

Em 01-01-2011 18:58, Sveinn í Felli escreveu:

Þann lau 1.jan 2011 19:57, skrifaði NoOp:

On 12/31/2010 02:18 AM, Sveinn í Felli wrote:


(snip)


I'm more interested in something like the mso2ooo:
http://leapon.net/en/mso2ooo-batch-convert-microsoft-office-documents-openoffice-documents




(snip)



Best,

Sveinn



LibreOffice and OpenOffice already have a batch file format converter as
a wizzard since relase 1 . Any hint on where this one is better or worse
than the native one?

Regards



Does it support (read/convert from) .docx/..xlsx etc. ?

Sveinn

--
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

2011-01-02 Thread James Wilde

Is anyone else getting the impression that this thread is polarising into US v 
rest of world?  

We've seen several people say that they have to accept what their customers 
provide and can't go back to the customer and say can you provide this in 
another format?.  To me that's an attitude which I, rightly or wrongly, 
associate with the US.  In Europe we just fire away an email and get the file 
back again in another format.

And the other side of the coin, as others have said, outside the US more and 
more governments and non-US corporations are going over to FLOSS, whereas in 
the US, Microsoft is dominant.

If this is the case, we're never going to reach concensus on this topic.  
Personally I've already signed up on Larry's side.  How about this for a 
compromise:

LibO comes with support to read docx (which it converts to ODT), but not to 
write it.  When someone tries to write it, a notice comes up saying in effect 
that docx is a broken format which even MS doesn't think much of, and that 
LibO, in the interests of free standards does not support it in vanilla mode.  
However, click on this button and we'll save in doc format. One might even 
provide two buttons (plus Cancel), Save as doc and Save as odt.

But for the Americans and others who might want it, a downloadable module is 
provided which will write to docx format.  Then we turn the matter over to the 
educators, communicators and marketers to educate, communicate with and market 
to the North American continent.  Then those who want it can get docx 
compatibility, but they have to make an active choice and they're told it's 
risky and why.

//James
-- 
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


On 1/2/11 4:50 PM, James Wilde wrote:


LibO comes with support to read docx (which it converts to ODT), but not to 
write it.  When someone tries to write it, a notice comes up saying in effect 
that docx is a broken format which even MS doesn't think much of, and that 
LibO, in the interests of free standards does not support it in vanilla mode.  
However, click on this button and we'll save in doc format. One might even 
provide two buttons (plus Cancel), Save as doc and Save as odt.


LibreOffice reads and writes OOXML, and I do not think that changing 
this behaviour can bring any advantage over the current situation in any 
geography. Most corporate users in Europe use OOXML if their company has 
switched to Office 2007, and they are not knowledgeable about document 
format. Avoiding the support of OOXML is not the best choice for the 
people that have to interoperate with these users.


Of course, we are going to educate users about standard formats, but 
this is not going to happen if we refuse to support a format or tell 
that OOXML is a broken format. We can get respect only if we respect our 
competitors. We are not here to fight Microsoft, and the OOXML support 
is not an assessment of the quality of the format (as it was for DOC, 
XLS and PPT).


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

2011-01-02 Thread RGB ES

IMO, to put the write part on an external extension is a good idea.
There are other extensions for import export (like
OpenOffice.org2GoogleDocs that gives export capabilities to
GoogleDocs, Zoho and WebDAV)
I still think that there are too many thing on save as dialogue that
should go on export instead, but moving at least this conflictive
ooxml part to an extension could bring some peace

2011/1/2 James Wilde wilde.ja...@gmail.com:
 Is anyone else getting the impression that this thread is polarising into US 
 v rest of world?

 We've seen several people say that they have to accept what their customers 
 provide and can't go back to the customer and say can you provide this in 
 another format?.  To me that's an attitude which I, rightly or wrongly, 
 associate with the US.  In Europe we just fire away an email and get the file 
 back again in another format.

 And the other side of the coin, as others have said, outside the US more and 
 more governments and non-US corporations are going over to FLOSS, whereas in 
 the US, Microsoft is dominant.

 If this is the case, we're never going to reach concensus on this topic.  
 Personally I've already signed up on Larry's side.  How about this for a 
 compromise:

 LibO comes with support to read docx (which it converts to ODT), but not to 
 write it.  When someone tries to write it, a notice comes up saying in effect 
 that docx is a broken format which even MS doesn't think much of, and that 
 LibO, in the interests of free standards does not support it in vanilla mode. 
  However, click on this button and we'll save in doc format. One might even 
 provide two buttons (plus Cancel), Save as doc and Save as odt.

 But for the Americans and others who might want it, a downloadable module is 
 provided which will write to docx format.  Then we turn the matter over to 
 the educators, communicators and marketers to educate, communicate with and 
 market to the North American continent.  Then those who want it can get docx 
 compatibility, but they have to make an active choice and they're told it's 
 risky and why.

 //James
 --
 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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

On 1/1/2011 6:50 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:

Barbara,

First, ODF IS the ISO standard - honestly made so without the dirty
tricks that MS used to stuff the committee and force it to approve
something that wasn't ready to be used by anyone.

I recognize that, of course. But like it or not (and I'm definitely in the not camp), OOXML can
also claim to be a standard after the ISO shenanigans.

Second, MS refuses to support any ODF except the one that is actually an
ISO standard. That makes their version of ODF suspect as to its actual
compatibility.

Exactly. That's why I don't recommend sending OOo/LibO ODF to MS-only shops, the XP formats are more
interoperable. And the way MS chose to implement what is actually in the standard seems to have
taken advantage of the details that were left unspecified to force incompatibility with existing ODF
implementations, even if both adhered strictly to the existing ODF specification.

I don't suggest using the same tactics on MS as it is using on Open
Source Software. Doing to others as they do to you is NOT a recommended
tactic for honest people or organizations (though it's too often been
used, in my arrogant opinion [There AIN'T no such thing as a humble
opinion]).

Is that what you think it would be to implement the OOXML Strict formats? I sure don't see it that
way -- we would simply be supporting an ISO standard, however it was arrived at. The fact that we
could possibly do it before MS does is not doing to others as they do to you IMNSHO. I just think
it would be great if LibO became the reference implementation!

By being able to read .doc and .docx formats LO demonstrates it's
willingness to at least reach out to MS and its customers. Therefore,
LO ends up being the good guy.

Craig
Tyche

Right. That's why I think it's a good move to read them. The issue is about writing the Transitional
formats. Do you think we have to do that to claim the moral high ground?

On 01/01/2011 03:29 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

On 1/1/2011 11:07 AM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:

Hi Sveinn,

Sure, but how about conservation and readability by future generations
(when there's no more Microsoft knowledge around and nobody knows
anymore how to decrypt all the nuances of.doc + .docx files) ?

Fair point.

But: most users do not care. Not exporting to Word will make it look
like LibO is faulty.

I have to save in MSO formats to share work with others. At work, we
have an MSO policy.
While I can use whatever I like on my desktop, I have to save
spreadsheets in MSO formats
because Excel 07 kills ODS formulae. If I prepare a document as ODT,
the few Word 2003
dies-hards complain I am refusing to inter-operate. I do still assign
student work to be
submitted as either .doc or .odt and mark students down for using
.docx (they failed to read
the instructions). They are also marked down for not using proper
spacing and a serif font.

I don't want to see the .docx format spread any further and advocate
using ODT as the
default. However, not having the option to export as .doc and .docx
will cause users to
wonder if they want to promote LibO.

I don't think anybody is saying LibO should drop .doc export -- just not
try to export to the OOXML Transitional formats. In theory, MS will go
to OOXML Strict in the 2014 (or whenever) release, and that should by
then be a truly open format, if the comments submitted to the standards
committee are properly worked off. Meanwhile, exporting to the
Transitional form for new documents is specifically deprecated in the
ISO standard; doing that really plays into a possible MS strategy to
continue to ignore the Strict version forever, maintaining the
proprietary lock-in while claiming to be open.

Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save
but with a message clarifying the limitations of the format (and perhaps
recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with an MS-only
shop; their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable
level, the older formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least
for editing documents that are received in these formats -- I'm not
convinced it should be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the
SaveAs dialog should label the format using the word Transitional. It
probably makes sense to start working towards OOXML Strict export as
soon as that is a reasonably stationary target, though. Wouldn't it be
great if LibO were the first implementation compliant with the ISO
standard? And if the other FOSS implementations also headed there, we
could beat MS at their own game!

It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.
Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?

Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways,
always, anyways...

Office on-the-web only saves in docx. Office 2013/4 will

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

On 1/1/2011 7:53 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 01/01/2011 11:29 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

Standards support is a thorny field. The reality is that no one supports a standard by default,
but only with a specific choice in configuration (including LibreOffice with ODF, as 1.2 is not
yet the standard format and 1.2 Extended is not going to be a standard).

Supporting OOXML Strict today would make LO not compatible with MS Office, and users do want
interoperability and not just standard compliance.

Yes, that's why I think that it could make sense to write the Transitiional formats, with
appropriate warnings, at least for editing an existing document created in that form. But if we
offered both choices in the SaveAs, the way we support a number of different older MS formats with
appropriate version labeling, people could still choose the interoperable format. I'm not saying we
should go to Strict only. That would indeed be wrong, leading people to think that they could create
a .docx (for example) that would be interoperable when it is not. So I guess that's saying that a
new document could be created and saved as the Transitional format, at least as soon as we also
offered the Strict format. I just think we could avoid that situation until that point, though, as
long as the XP formats are reasonably interoperable. A new document created in LibO and saved in an
XP format should not violate interoperability, as long as MS continues to support that format. If
they dropped XP format support before we had a Strict version available, I agree we'd have to allow
writing new Transitional documents at that point. I'm just leery of doing it now.

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

2011-01-02 Thread Craig A. Eddy

I agree with your premises.  Having been a CAD operator who, at times,
had to send drawing files to others, I felt it was MY responsibility to
find out what the other person could read, or at least provide him/her
with a way to contact me if there were problems opening the file.  This
carried over to text and spreadsheet files, too, since with both drawing
files and text - spreadsheet files even the version number could affect
the person's ability to open the file.

I also agree that ANY write-to docx should be an add-on, and not part of
the vanilla release.

Craig
Tyche

On 01/02/2011 08:50 AM, James Wilde wrote:
 Is anyone else getting the impression that this thread is polarising into US 
 v rest of world?  
 
 We've seen several people say that they have to accept what their customers 
 provide and can't go back to the customer and say can you provide this in 
 another format?.  To me that's an attitude which I, rightly or wrongly, 
 associate with the US.  In Europe we just fire away an email and get the file 
 back again in another format.
 
 And the other side of the coin, as others have said, outside the US more and 
 more governments and non-US corporations are going over to FLOSS, whereas in 
 the US, Microsoft is dominant.
 
 If this is the case, we're never going to reach concensus on this topic.  
 Personally I've already signed up on Larry's side.  How about this for a 
 compromise:
 
 LibO comes with support to read docx (which it converts to ODT), but not to 
 write it.  When someone tries to write it, a notice comes up saying in effect 
 that docx is a broken format which even MS doesn't think much of, and that 
 LibO, in the interests of free standards does not support it in vanilla mode. 
  However, click on this button and we'll save in doc format. One might even 
 provide two buttons (plus Cancel), Save as doc and Save as odt.
 
 But for the Americans and others who might want it, a downloadable module is 
 provided which will write to docx format.  Then we turn the matter over to 
 the educators, communicators and marketers to educate, communicate with and 
 market to the North American continent.  Then those who want it can get docx 
 compatibility, but they have to make an active choice and they're told it's 
 risky and why.
 
 //James

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Mark Preston

Craig,

Please remember that both LibO and OpenO can already *read* the
formats and the issue is whether or not it is practical or pragmatic
to put effort into developing something to *write* the OOXML form.

On 02/01/2011 00:50, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
 Barbara,
 
 First, ODF IS the ISO standard - honestly made so without the dirty
 tricks that MS used to stuff the committee and force it to approve
 something that wasn't ready to be used by anyone.
 
 Second, MS refuses to support any ODF except the one that is actually an
 ISO standard.  That makes their version of ODF suspect as to its actual
 compatibility.
 
 I don't suggest using the same tactics on MS as it is using on Open
 Source Software.  Doing to others as they do to you is NOT a recommended
 tactic for honest people or organizations (though it's too often been
 used, in my arrogant opinion [There AIN'T no such thing as a humble
 opinion]).
 
 By being able to read .doc and .docx formats LO demonstrates it's
 willingness to at least reach out to MS and its customers.  Therefore,
 LO ends up being the good guy.
 
 Craig
 Tyche

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Craig A. Eddy



On 01/02/2011 09:08 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
--- SNIP ---
 

 Is that what you think it would be to implement the OOXML Strict
 formats? I sure don't see it that way -- we would simply be supporting
 an ISO standard, however it was arrived at. The fact that we could
 possibly do it before MS does is not doing to others as they do to you
 IMNSHO. I just think it would be great if LibO became the reference
 implementation!
 
I don't think LO could implement the writing of OOXML in ANY format that
would be compatible to MS.  And to try to do so would simply imply that
LO was broken (in MS's words, anyway).

 By being able to read .doc and .docx formats LO demonstrates it's
 willingness to at least reach out to MS and its customers.  Therefore,
 LO ends up being the good guy.

 Craig
 Tyche
 
 Right. That's why I think it's a good move to read them. The issue is
 about writing the Transitional formats. Do you think we have to do that
 to claim the moral high ground?

I don't feel that writing any of the OOXML formats would claim the moral
high ground.  I think writing OOXML would be like trying to hit a 10
inch randomly moving target from an aircraft at 10,000 feet moving in
the opposite direction.  First, you gotta get close and limit its
possible movements.  Right now, that's just not possible.  Look how long
it took to come up with a reasonably compatible version of doc to write.
 Nope, writing back as doc is good enough at this point.
 
 SNIP 

Craig
Tyche

-- 
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

On 02/01/11 17:07, Mark Preston wrote:
 Please remember that both LibO and OpenO can already *read* the
 formats and the issue is whether or not it is practical or pragmatic
 to put effort into developing something to *write* the OOXML form.

My understanding is that Microsoft intends to implement strict OOXML
gradually, with each successive release of Microsoft Office using an
increasingly 'strict' form of transitional OOXML. Assuming that I am
correct in this assumption, does it not make sense that Microsoft will
make each successive version of their transitional OOXML backwards
compatible with their last and that they will release updates or add-ons
to ensure forward compatibility for older products (Office 2007 and 2010).

Those are of course unfounded assumptions, but reasonable ones none the
less. Thus if this is the case, we're not talking about maintaining
support for 3+ different versions of OOXML but rather maintaining
support for the latest version of Microsoft's transitional OOXML (and
perhaps strict OOXML) which should (eventually) become strict OOXML. Now
I assume nobody has an issue with strict OOXML (which is, as I
understand it, an open standard) so why would you have an issue with
implementing by graduations (in line with Microsoft) strict OOXML via a
series of transitional specifications?

Kind Regards,

Lee Hyde.

-- 
In order to offer someone a financial reward without him working for
it, the government must first ensure that somebody else works for a
financial reward without getting it. There is no other way.

-- Douglas Wilson


-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Robert Parker

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 12:48 AM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 2011/01/02 11:24 AM  Italo Vignoli wrote:

 On 1/2/11 6:20 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:

  Nope, writing back as doc is good enough at this point.

 Definitely not. LibreOffice writes OOXML and will write OOXML, and this is
 not under discussion. Our developers have the right skills to decide about
 the quality and the features of the filter.

 LibreOffice should not write OOXML. That is under discussion in this thread.

 Who gave you the right to say it is not under discussion? Isn't this a
 community project? When did the community decide that writing OOXML has to
 be included in LibreOffice?

I think the point was that the developers will decide whether to
support OOXML or not. It is up to them if they decide to take notice
of the conflicting opinions on this list.

Bob

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Robert Parker

On Mon, Jan 3, 2011 at 1:15 AM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:


 It is a community decision, not a developer decision.

The developers, that is the people doing the work, will decide what LO
does and does not do. I'm sure those good hard working folk will take
into account discussions here and no doubt elsewhere. But the decision
rests with them.

What will you do if they decide other than what you want. Buy Microsoft instead?

Bob

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Charles Marcus

On 2011-01-02 12:20 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
 I don't think LO could implement the writing of OOXML in ANY format that
 would be compatible to MS.  And to try to do so would simply imply that
 LO was broken (in MS's words, anyway).

What are you talking about? As has been pointed out numerous times, LibO
*already* *does* write OOXML.

I'm glad you're not the decision maker...

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread M. Fioretti

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 11:35:24 AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker
(gbpli...@gmail.com) wrote:

 On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:
 
 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,
 
 Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is
 TOTALLY ARROGANT?

Uh??? In that part of your message you had made a purely technical
assertion. You had said that email CLIENTS (i.e. not the actual people
sending email, but the software programs they use) always reply in
the same format in which the original message was received.

I only noticed that this purely technical assertion of yours IS wrong
because it is an undeniable fact (for which I personally bear NO
responsibility...) that the sending format in most email clients is
only a *default* that users can change as they please, not to mention
that some email clients only send as plain text. You made a technical
assertion, I replied at the same level. If you think a technical
default setting of most email clients (i.e. not the way people use or
configure them) is totally arrogant, yell at their developers, not at
me.

 If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because
 YOU want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.

Sure. But it's still wrong, as I already pointed out, to mix
txt-vs-html email with ODF-vs-OOXML, because HTML is really open and
not controlled by one company, OOXML is a totally different
situation. So if you really need to insist in this thread (and I take
the fact that you only replied at my last paragraph as a sign that you
agree with everything else I wrote), at least please drop email
examples entirely.

Marco F.

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Bruno Girin

On 2 January 2011 10:50, James Wilde wilde.ja...@gmail.com wrote:
 Is anyone else getting the impression that this thread is polarising into US 
 v rest of world?

 We've seen several people say that they have to accept what their customers 
 provide and can't go back to the customer and say can you provide this in 
 another format?.  To me that's an attitude which I, rightly or wrongly, 
 associate with the US.  In Europe we just fire away an email and get the file 
 back again in another format.

I beg to differ. I have worked in France, Luxembourg and now the UK
and in every single case MS Office is the standard that everybody
uses, both at work and at home. Most of them are not even aware that
alternatives exist and the first thing they ask when you suggest they
use open source is whether it is fully compatible with MS Office.

If I were to ask any of my European customers to provide documents in
another format, they would first have an issue finding a format that
they can write to (they don't have the ODF plugins, they can't produce
PDF and RTF tends to be too limited for their needs), then assuming
they can find a file format that we can both read and write, they
would do it once, maybe twice but the third time they would ask me to
stop being a pain in the backside and get myself a copy of MS Office.



 And the other side of the coin, as others have said, outside the US more and 
 more governments and non-US corporations are going over to FLOSS, whereas in 
 the US, Microsoft is dominant.

Some governments and organisations have allegedly moved to FLOSS but
I've not yet encountered one in real life. People are starting to take
notice of FLOSS but they only consider it if they have a smooth
migration path and that includes being able to interact seamlessly
with their existing software install base and with their customers and
suppliers. If you make the migration path difficult, they won't
migrate. And considering how ubiquitous office documents are in the
average enterprise, migrating means supporting the MS Office formats
along the ODF ones.



 If this is the case, we're never going to reach concensus on this topic.  
 Personally I've already signed up on Larry's side.  How about this for a 
 compromise:

 LibO comes with support to read docx (which it converts to ODT), but not to 
 write it.  When someone tries to write it, a notice comes up saying in effect 
 that docx is a broken format which even MS doesn't think much of, and that 
 LibO, in the interests of free standards does not support it in vanilla mode. 
  However, click on this button and we'll save in doc format. One might even 
 provide two buttons (plus Cancel), Save as doc and Save as odt.

This argument has been tried before with web standards and other
document formats. Unfortunately, it's an argument that FLOSS cannot
win. Not because the FLOSS point of view is wrong but because the
argument goes well above the heads of the majority of users. From
their point of view, they use MS Office all the time, it produces the
types of documents they need. The way most non-technical users see it
(and a large number of technical users too), if LibreOffice can't read
and write MS Office documents then LibreOffice is broken.

Besides, saying that docx is broken and suggesting to save to doc
feels counter productive to me: even though docx is far from being
perfect, it's still a lot more open and free than doc.


 But for the Americans and others who might want it, a downloadable module is 
 provided which will write to docx format.  Then we turn the matter over to 
 the educators, communicators and marketers to educate, communicate with and 
 market to the North American continent.  Then those who want it can get docx 
 compatibility, but they have to make an active choice and they're told it's 
 risky and why.

Ubuntu tried exactly that for non-free codecs: install only free
codecs by default but give the users the possibility to add non-free
codecs through the extras package later on. In the latest release
(10.10 -- Maverick Meerkat), they actually made it easier for users to
install non-free codecs by making it an option in the installation
wizard. The reason for it was that the non-free codecs package was not
easily discoverable for new users and not installing them by default
generated a lot of queries in the forums.

So maybe it would be useful to learn from the Ubuntu experience,
provide a single version of LibreOffice and include an option in the
installation wizard to install support for OOXML or not, with an
explanation about what that choice means.

My £0.02

Bruno

-- 
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


On 1/2/11 7:49 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:


Does it?  And to what degree of compatibility?  Also, this was code that
was brought in from GO-OO which, as you may be aware, was developed by
Novell UNDER CONTRACT TO MS.  No, I'm not hollering FLOSS, here.  I'm
trying to get you to understand that there are copyright and patent
issues here that could embroil LO in legal battles that it really
doesn't need.


OOXML has been cleared from copyright and patent issues by Microsoft 
itself before entering into the standardization process, as this is a 
pre-condition of ISO standards. In addition, all Microsoft document 
formats and related technologies are now fully documented (also those 
totally proprietary). It looks like many people have not followed the 
OOXML standardization process.


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

On 1/2/2011 12:01 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:

On 01/02/2011 10:46 AM, Lee Hyde wrote:
SNIP

My understanding is that Microsoft intends to implement strict OOXML
gradually, with each successive release of Microsoft Office using an
increasingly 'strict' form of transitional OOXML. Assuming that I am
correct in this assumption, does it not make sense that Microsoft will
make each successive version of their transitional OOXML backwards
compatible with their last and that they will release updates or add-ons
to ensure forward compatibility for older products (Office 2007 and 2010).

I, personally, cannot make that presumption, based on previous
experience with Microsoft. There is a dichotomy between what MS says
and what it does. And an even wider one between what one might presume
and what MS does.
SNIP

Now
I assume nobody has an issue with strict OOXML (which is, as I
understand it, an open standard) so why would you have an issue with
implementing by graduations (in line with Microsoft) strict OOXML via a
series of transitional specifications?

I'm concerned by what you mean by an open standard. To me, open means
free to use and free to see. From what I understand of the OOXML ISO as
it was passed there are a lot of MS add-ons that are proprietary, as
well as a lot of binary blobs that are proprietary. Also a number of
definitions that are so vague that they are, for all intents and
purposed, unable to be implemented as written. Therefore, I can not
look at OOXML as being and OPEN standard. Yes, it is a standard (to
Microsoft's eternal shame). But OPEN it is NOT.

Are those faults true of the Strict version (at least, after incorporation of comments), or only of
the Transitional version? My understanding was that the Strict form can become truly open.

Kind Regards,

Lee Hyde.

SNIP

Craig
Tyche

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

On 02/01/11 18:49, Craig A. Eddy wrote:
 I'm trying to get you to understand that there are copyright and patent
 issues here that could embroil LO in legal battles that it really
 doesn't need.

Just out of curiosity, were Microsoft to enforce their copyright over
their version of OOXML, is it not proper legal etiquette to request
removal of the offending code *before* taking the issue to court? If
that is the case, LibO could simply remove the offending code in an
update and publicise this new-found lack of interoperability with
Microsoft Office is a direct result Microsoft’s litigious behaviour.
Such would be a public relations nightmare for Microsoft would it not,
and against its own best interests.

Also, are there any previous cases where a proprietary standard has been
withdrawn or locked down via legal action such as this?

Lee Hyde.

-- 
We Americans claim to be a peace-loving people. We hate bloodshed; we
are opposed to violence. Yet we go into spasms of joy over the
possibility of projecting dynamite bombs from flying machines upon
helpless citizens. We are ready to hang, electrocute, or lynch anyone,
who, from economic necessity, will risk his own life in the attempt upon
that of some industrial magnate. Yet our hearts swell with pride at the
thought that America is becoming the most powerful nation on earth, and
that she will eventually plant her iron foot on the necks of all other
nations. Such is the logic of patriotism.

-- Emma Goldman, What is Patriotism? (1908)


-- 
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

On 1/2/2011 12:47 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/2/11 7:15 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote:

No, that was not the point. Italo Vignoli wrote: LibreOffice writes
OOXML and will write OOXML, and this is
not under discussion. That is the point I objected to.

I might have been too harsh, but I reiterate the fact that this is not under discussion. TDF is a
community based project, but decisions have to be taken by people in charge of taking them, and in
this case these people are in the ESC (Engineering Steering Committee).

The se are the bylaws of TDF (you are free to check).

I am a member of the Steering Committee, and I totally second this decision just because it makes
sense for the users (as I have tried to explain in another message). LibreOffice is the office
suite with the widest document format support, and this is a plus.

As long as OOXML is a standard recognized by ISO, it makes sense to support it
completely.

This is different from the fact that we are trying to make ODF the only winning standard, and that
we are telling people that they should not use OOXML.

It should be a community decision, not one made by the developers. Or
based on LibreOffice being based on Go-OO code which already had OOXML
write support because of the Novell agreement with Microsoft.

I think that your problem is the Microsoft/Novell agreement, as you have mentioned it several
times. This belongs to the AGAINST saga that we do not want to pursue. Writing OOXML is FOR
interoperability, and so it is better than not writing OOXML because is AGAINST Microsoft.

In addition, TDF is a software project, and therefore some decisions have to be taken by people
professional at developing software. If you want to have a say in software development you are
welcome to contribute to the code and you will soon be able to talk to the ESC, or maybe become a
member of the ESC.

TDF is a community driven project, not a mailing list driven project. Community is not just
writing in a mailing list, is a lot different and a lot more than that. I do not think that we
ever gave the perception that this is a mailing list driven project.

Italo, one of the things that would make me (and maybe others here) feel better about OOXML support
is if writing to the XP formats causes LibO to make compromises that do not have to be made going to
OOXML. That is, if documents developed under an ODF application can be converted to a higher-quality
product, in terms of compatibility of features and formatting, when going to OOXML (even in the
Transitional formats) than they can when going to XP. Is that the case?

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

On 02/01/11 19:01, Larry Gusaas wrote:
 No. What is included is a community decision, not just the developers.

My interpretation is that *The Document Foundation* and *LibreOffice*
projects are driven more by informal consensus rather than democracy per
se. That is to say that the various steering committees make their final
decisions based upon a mixture of community opinion, technical and
pragmatic considerations. An efficient community driven project has to
give greater weight to the latter of these three (technical and
pragmatic considerations) whilst also taking on board *valid* community
discussion.

It would seem, thus, that the engineering steering committee have
decided that the arguments against implementing OOXML are outweighed by
the technical and pragmatic benefits of full interoperability with the
world leading office suite (which perhaps lamentably is Microsoft
Office). The politics of this decision may be contentious to the
community (or rather this mailing list) but basing decisions on a
political platform such as this will only lead to LibO falling into
obscurity because it doesn't *just work*.

Regards,

Lee Hyde.


-- 
The division of mankind threatens it with destruction. Only universal
cooperation under conditions of intellectual freedom and the lofty moral
ideals of socialism and labor, accompanied by the elimination of
dogmatism and pressure of the concealed interests of ruling classes,
will preserve civilization.

-- Andrei Sakharov, The New York Times (July 22nd, 1968)


-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread M. Fioretti

On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 19:58:41 PM +0100, Italo Vignoli
(italo.vign...@gmail.com) wrote:

 OOXML has been cleared from copyright and patent issues by Microsoft
 itself before entering into the standardization process, as this is
 a pre-condition of ISO standards. In addition, all Microsoft
 document formats and related technologies are now fully documented
 (also those totally proprietary). It looks like many people have not
 followed the OOXML standardization process.

Italo,

I HAVE tried to follow that process as much as I could through the
years, and my understanding, from the links below and many others, is
that, in practice, even today things aren't really so easy, 100% clear
and risk-free with OOXML. 

http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/03/what-should-happen-with-ooxmlo.html
http://techrights.org/2010/01/11/ooxml-depending-on-country/
http://techrights.org/2010/10/03/amicus-briefs-in-i4i-vs-microsoft/
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/02/by-metes-and-bounds.html
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2010/09/recipe-for-open-standards.html

Marco F.

-- 
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

2011-01-02 Thread Charles-H. Schulz

Hello everyone,


2011/1/2 M. Fioretti mfiore...@nexaima.net

 On Sun, Jan 02, 2011 19:58:41 PM +0100, Italo Vignoli
 (italo.vign...@gmail.com) wrote:

  OOXML has been cleared from copyright and patent issues by Microsoft
  itself before entering into the standardization process, as this is
  a pre-condition of ISO standards. In addition, all Microsoft
  document formats and related technologies are now fully documented
  (also those totally proprietary). It looks like many people have not
  followed the OOXML standardization process.

 Italo,

 I HAVE tried to follow that process as much as I could through the
 years, and my understanding, from the links below and many others, is
 that, in practice, even today things aren't really so easy, 100% clear
 and risk-free with OOXML.

 http://broadcast.oreilly.com/2010/03/what-should-happen-with-ooxmlo.html
 http://techrights.org/2010/01/11/ooxml-depending-on-country/
 http://techrights.org/2010/10/03/amicus-briefs-in-i4i-vs-microsoft/
 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2008/02/by-metes-and-bounds.html
 http://www.robweir.com/blog/2010/09/recipe-for-open-standards.html






I would like, if possible, to appease everyone here by clarifying two
questions.
- to my knowledge most of the OOXML intellectual property has been indeed
cleared from most issues, although Marco rightly pointed to some existing
inconsistencies. However, it's fortunately or unfortunately, should not be a
problem: OOo  LibO implement the existing and used version of MS
*proprietary formats* used in MS Office 2007 and 2010 that are called OOXML.
They're not exactly the ISO standard, far from that; feel free to call them
transitional if you wish, but it's very much of a grey area and I just call
them MS propietary formats. So what LibO does is to offer convenience to its
users: if it weren't I would suggest not to import/export in the old .doc
format as well, as it would follow the same pattern of thoughts.

- I would like to clarify that when we talk about a community, we do talk
about a community of contributors. I hope everyone has read our bylaws. It's
not just developers who contribute (yes, also QA testers among others) but
it's not anyone posting on a mailing list. In fact, posting on a mailing
list is not exactly a contribution. LibO is a meritocracy, not a shoutocracy
or a democracy. What Italo was explaining was that the choice to offer save
as OOXML (again, the format you find MS Office 2007 and 2010) has been made
by the people who contribute code at this stage. As the bylaws will
progressively become effective, we will gain more and more contributors and
perhaps this choice, through contributions, will change. But at this stage
it's unnecessary to argue over that on mailing lists.

Thank you.

Charles-H. Schulz
Co-Founder, The Document Foundation
 sometimes Member of the OASIS Consortium BoD.



 Marco F.

 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

2011-01-02 Thread Cor Nouws


Larry Gusaas wrote (02-01-11 20:09)

On 2011/01/02 12:47 PM Italo Vignoli wrote:

If you want to have a say in software development you are welcome to
contribute to the code


So only people who write code have a say in the development of
LibreOffice? What about people who do the QA? Or the people providing
support? (I mainly provide support for OOo, mainly for Mac users)


Hmm, of course not. Luckily there is cooperation between people doing 
(all sorts of) QA, helping with user experience (design) topics and the 
developers. So that all helps and leads to choices being made.


Regards,
Cor

--
 - giving openoffice.org its foundation :: The Document Foundation -


--
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


On 1/2/11 8:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:


Italo, one of the things that would make me (and maybe others here) feel
better about OOXML support is if writing to the XP formats causes LibO
to make compromises that do not have to be made going to OOXML. That is,
if documents developed under an ODF application can be converted to a
higher-quality product, in terms of compatibility of features and
formatting, when going to OOXML (even in the Transitional formats) than
they can when going to XP. Is that the case?


Writing in a different format from the native one is always a problem, 
and causes a number of compromises. The advantage of OOXML over the old 
MS proprietary formats is that is based on XML and therefore is similar 
to ODF in the sense that is a container of the document components 
(once you have unzipped the file, you get a number of folders and files 
with all the contents). The better choice is always the native format, 
though, and we will always promote this choice.


Writing support of OOXML is important for interoperability, which is a 
key user requirement. I do not know if writing OOXML has a higher level 
of compromises than writing in the old MS proprietary formats, because I 
am not a technical expert and I trust on developers and engineers for 
these issues. I suppose that there are different compromises.


I know that OOXML is a Microsoft format with many problems. I have been 
involved in the entire standardization process, and I was against the 
standardization of OOXML.


But once the standard has been approved, I have stopped fighting the 
document format, because I think is more important to direct my efforts 
towards user requirements. Please remember that TDF will strive FOR and 
not AGAINST, and this is a typical situation where if you are FOR user 
requirements you have to forget that you are AGAINST OOXML.


FOR is always stronger than AGAINST.

--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

2011-01-02 Thread Olivier Hallot


HI

Em 02-01-2011 15:48, Larry Gusaas escreveu:


On 2011/01/02 11:24 AM Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/2/11 6:20 PM, Craig A. Eddy wrote:


(snip)



LibreOffice should not write OOXML. That is under discussion in this
thread.

Who gave you the right to say it is not under discussion? Isn't this a
community project? When did the community decide that writing OOXML has
to be included in LibreOffice?


Larry


Allow me to jump in: If TDF and its developers decide not to implement 
OOXML, then someone, somewhere, someday, with or without TDF or 
community blessing, will implement it, as a fork or as an extension.


That is why free software is for.
--
Olivier Hallot
Founder, Steering Commitee Member - The Document Foundation
Voicing the enterprise
Translation Leader for Brazilian Portuguese

--
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

On 1/2/2011 2:29 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/2/11 8:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

Italo, one of the things that would make me (and maybe others here) feel
better about OOXML support is if writing to the XP formats causes LibO
to make compromises that do not have to be made going to OOXML. That is,
if documents developed under an ODF application can be converted to a
higher-quality product, in terms of compatibility of features and
formatting, when going to OOXML (even in the Transitional formats) than
they can when going to XP. Is that the case?

Writing in a different format from the native one is always a problem, and causes a number of
compromises. The advantage of OOXML over the old MS proprietary formats is that is based on XML
and therefore is similar to ODF in the sense that is a container of the document components
(once you have unzipped the file, you get a number of folders and files with all the contents).
The better choice is always the native format, though, and we will always promote this choice.

It would be good to know which works better for interoperability when sent to an MS-only shop -- ODF
or the current OOXML. In other words, is the LibO version of OOXML a better product than the MS
version of ODF? Very interesting, if so. I'd like to know which to recommend. And of course the
Sun(free)/Oracle(not free) plugin for MS Office is a player in this question, too. I know it's
better than the MS ODF, but how does it compare to the LibO OOXML?

Writing support of OOXML is important for interoperability, which is a key user requirement. I do
not know if writing OOXML has a higher level of compromises than writing in the old MS proprietary
formats, because I am not a technical expert and I trust on developers and engineers for these
issues. I suppose that there are different compromises.

I guess the key issue is whether this writing should essentially be given LibO's official sanction
(that is, by being included without reservation in the SaveAs dialogs, and in the Tools Options
settings for defaults), or simply available as a deprecated format when forced into it. I agree that
sending back an XP format given an OOXML one is likely to cause problems for LibO (that seems to be
what OOo does, opening them as Read-Only with an XP extension and a constructed name that has no
relation to the original). I would definitely be against removing the capability to write those
formats altogether; but the official sanction of them does not seem necessary.

I know that OOXML is a Microsoft format with many problems. I have been involved in the entire
standardization process, and I was against the standardization of OOXML.

But once the standard has been approved, I have stopped fighting the document format, because I
think is more important to direct my efforts towards user requirements. Please remember that TDF
will strive FOR and not AGAINST, and this is a typical situation where if you are FOR user
requirements you have to forget that you are AGAINST OOXML.

In my view, the user requirement is for the best possible interoperability. So I'd like to know what
that is -- and there still seems to be a possibility that for new documents constructed in LibO,
writing the XP formats provides better interoperability than writing the OOXML ones. That's not a
FOR or AGAINST issue, it's a matter of product quality. Giving a SaveAs choice for the OOXML format,
indicating that it is for recent Office versions, definitely leads people in the OOXML direction
whether that has better interoperability or not. If it does, so be it -- though I'd still like to
see a warning that it's not really an open standard. If people are in an environment that encourages
or mandates use of open standards, this isn't one!

FOR is always stronger than AGAINST.

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

2011-01-02 Thread Mike Hall


On 02/01/2011 19:09, Larry Gusaas wrote:

On 2011/01/02 12:47 PM  Italo Vignoli wrote:
If you want to have a say in software development you are welcome to 
contribute to the code


So only people who write code have a say in the development of 
LibreOffice? What about people who do the QA? Or the people providing 
support? (I mainly provide support for OOo, mainly for Mac users)


You can take your elitist developer attitude and stuff it.

Larry

Larry,
There is more heat than light now.

I haven't counted, but my clear sense is that considerably more 
contributors to this thread have, however reluctantly, come down on the 
side of retaining the functionality of writing OOXML. In that sense, a 
'decision' is made, even though it's the ESC who ultimately decide.


Nevertheless, as you seem to imply, the OOO/LibO development process has 
always been broken.


In an effective development process (eg Firefox), the contents of the 
next release, including a positive decision on those bugs to be 
resolved, are decided by a steering committee. Work continues until all 
of that activity is complete and the release is ready. It is common for 
releases to be delayed because things are not ready. With this process, 
releases have very few bugs.


In an ineffective development process (eg OOO), the contents of the next 
release are set in large part by developers setting release targets for 
the bits of work they choose to focus on. If I understand correctly, the 
steering committee influences new functionality content, but not 
substantially the bug fix content of a release. Thus the content of the 
work, particularly bug fixes, is in large measure determined by 
developer interest rather than priority or end user wishes. A deadline 
for release contents is fixed and anything not ready at this date is put 
back to a later release, even P2 bug issues. Very serious issues are 
fixed after the chosen date, but nothing else. With this process, 
releases inevitably have an increasing number of bugs.


This is a cultural and organisational issue, not a result of an Open 
Source project. I hope TDF will recognise this and address it.


--
Mike Hall
www.onepoyle.net



--
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

2011-01-02 Thread Bruno Girin

On 2 January 2011 17:19, Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com wrote:
 On 1/2/2011 2:29 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

 On 1/2/11 8:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

[snip]

 It would be good to know which works better for interoperability when sent
 to an MS-only shop -- ODF or the current OOXML. In other words, is the LibO
 version of OOXML a better product than the MS version of ODF? Very
 interesting, if so. I'd like to know which to recommend. And of course the
 Sun(free)/Oracle(not free) plugin for MS Office is a player in this
 question, too. I know it's better than the MS ODF, but how does it compare
 to the LibO OOXML?

OOXML wins hands down in this use case. Not because the LibO/OOo OOXML
is better than the Microsoft ODF or Sun/Oracle plugin for MS Office
but because the vast majority of MS-only shops don't bother installing
support for ODF in the first place. I went through this with a
customer recently: it ended up being a lot easier for me to output
OOXML or good old DOC than for them to install the right plugins to
read ODF. This is compounded by the fact that a lot of MS-only shops
are large companies that still use Windows XP with an old version of
Office.

Bruno

-- 
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

On 1/2/2011 4:56 PM, Bruno Girin wrote:

On 2 January 2011 17:19, Barbara Dupreyb...@onr.com wrote:

On 1/2/2011 2:29 PM, Italo Vignoli wrote:

On 1/2/11 8:15 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:

[snip]

It would be good to know which works better for interoperability when sent
to an MS-only shop -- ODF or the current OOXML. In other words, is the LibO
version of OOXML a better product than the MS version of ODF? Very
interesting, if so. I'd like to know which to recommend. And of course the
Sun(free)/Oracle(not free) plugin for MS Office is a player in this
question, too. I know it's better than the MS ODF, but how does it compare
to the LibO OOXML?

OOXML wins hands down in this use case. Not because the LibO/OOo OOXML
is better than the Microsoft ODF or Sun/Oracle plugin for MS Office
but because the vast majority of MS-only shops don't bother installing
support for ODF in the first place. I went through this with a
customer recently: it ended up being a lot easier for me to output
OOXML or good old DOC than for them to install the right plugins to
read ODF. This is compounded by the fact that a lot of MS-only shops
are large companies that still use Windows XP with an old version of
Office.

Bruno

I was under the impression that the vanilla versions of Office since 2007 SP2 could read and write
ODF formats, with no need to install any plugins (but with their own special twist on ODF). From
what you say here, that is not true; I haven't installed Office in a long time, and don't intend to,
so I didn't know that ODF support was not automatic. (Actually, I'm glad it isn't! There's less
chance of the MS version co-opting the market.) Obviously those shops using the old versions of
Office need the corresponding version-specific formats, not OOXML in any form, and hopefully they'll
tell their correspondents which one. For the case where the version is unknown, the XP format is the
still the safest if you are originating a new document to send them that they'll need to be able to
edit. And maybe it is the best even if you know they have a recent version -- that's still not clear.

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


On 1/3/11 1:12 AM, Barbara Duprey wrote:


I was under the impression that the vanilla versions of Office since
2007 SP2 could read and write ODF formats, with no need to install any
plugins (but with their own special twist on ODF). From what you say
here, that is not true; I haven't installed Office in a long time, and
don't intend to, so I didn't know that ODF support was not automatic.


ODF support is built in since MS Office 2007 SP2 for Windows. MS Office 
for MacOS does not support ODF, and there is not a plugin availble. The 
older version of MS Office do not support ODF, but there is a plugin 
available.


We all know that Microsoft is trying to slow down ANY standard format, 
because format lock in is a long time strategy.


I do not know if you are familiar with Gandhi statement: First they 
ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win.


This is exactly what is happening for office suites.

Gandhi won over the British empire being respectful of law and being an 
advocate of freedom. I do not have his moral strength, but I do follow 
his lesson.


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

2011-01-02 Thread Bernhard Dippold


Hi Larry, all,

Larry Gusaas schrieb:

On 2011/01/02 12:47 PM  Italo Vignoli wrote:

If you want to have a say in software development you are welcome to
contribute to the code


As I know Italo (not being a programmer himself) quite well, I know that 
his reply could have been easier for you to understand, if he added more 
information:


Our community consists of several groups with several tasks. Every group 
has it's own expertize and inside these groups people know each other 
and know about their expertize and position in our community.


Software development is done by code contributors. They can write the 
code they want, but only the code bringing more positive aspects than 
negative ones will be included in the package.


If other groups see problems in some code contributions, they start to 
discuss this topic with the coders, providing them with the expertize on 
the specific context (User Experience is a good example, the topic here 
might belong to Marketing) and trying to convince them, that the 
negative aspects are more valid than the positive ones.


If they don't get to a common conclusion, the last decision will be 
taken by the Board of Directors, at the moment by the Steering Committee 
until the BoD will have been elected.


So only people who write code have a say in the development of
LibreOffice? What about people who do the QA? Or the people providing
support? (I mainly provide support for OOo, mainly for Mac users)


I hope you understand the basis of meritocracy - so all the contributors 
are relevant in *their specific area of expertize*


This thread shows several thoughts and positions towards the OOXML write 
support in LibO.


Some people want to get rid of it, some want to have it moved to a 
different place in the program (export, extension), some want to provide 
a clearer description of the negative aspects of the format.


Others want to keep it as it is and evolve it towards better quality.

So how can we find out, which way is the right one to go?

Surely not by following the loudest or most active posters in this thread.

I don't know if you are involved deeply enough in our community to know 
about the position of one of another contributor to this thread.


I'm quite sure that I miss some of the relevant people, but please have 
a look at the postings by the Steering Committee members:


Thorsten Behrens (code developer), who mentioned that it is necessary to 
work on the OOXML filters now, because this is the only way to provide 
high quality at the time MS drops their .doc support.


Italo Vignoli (marketing expert and official marketing contact for TDF) 
pointing several times to the necessity to provide the best solution for 
our (present and future) users, proposing to avoid any marketing 
strategy against Microsoft and to leave education about more open 
standard in ODF to our marketing group instead of removing existing 
code from the sources.


I could mention Charles-H. Schulz, Sophie Gautier, Cor Nouws and others, 
but the main fact is:


All the points mentioned in this thread have been taken into 
consideration by the Steering Committee and the developers.


Thus it was really important to raise such kind of questions.

We are a community where concerns are heard. But repeating them don't 
impose a higher relevance to them.


So despite good reasons to abandon the write support for OOXML from our 
standard save-as dialog, the reasons to keep it are more important.


It might be quite easy to change the wording of the warning text when 
saving in non-ODF document formats (different texts for MS proprietary 
and quasi-open formats might need more programming skills), so if 
someone provides an improved text as patch - or finds a programmer 
willing to build a patch from such wording - I'm quite sure that this 
will find positive consideration.


In my eyes this thread has been reached a size that covers most of the 
aspects of the subject, so I'd like to see it ending soon.


If someone is interested in collecting all the opinions mentioned here 
in a wiki page, it would be easier to point there, when someone (without 
knowledge of all the mails here) restarts a similar topic again.




You can take your elitist developer attitude and stuff it.


Pleas stop such comments, they don't lead to any positive result.

Thanks in advance!

Bernhard

PS: And to come back on your very first statement, the agreement between 
Microsoft and Novell: Even if some Novell employees work on our code, 
even if they contributed Go-oo code - this doesn't mean that they have 
to follow their employers opinion in their spare time. TDF is open to 
contributors from more than one company, so dependency is much less 
relevant than at OOo. And if you have a look at the Credits page in your 
LibO version, you can compare the contributor's names with Go-oo 
contributors (or a list of Novell employees, if you have one): Only a 
minority of our contributors are paid by Novell. TDF

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

2011-01-02 Thread todd rme

On Sun, Jan 2, 2011 at 10:17 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 2011/01/02 8:51 PM  Lee Hyde wrote:

 I haven't
 read anything from Italo that could be construed as condescension.

 Italo wrote:

   If you want to have a say in software development you are welcome to
 contribute to the
   code and you will soon be able to talk to the ESC, or maybe become a
 member of the ESC. 

 That is pure condescension. He is saying that because I do not write code my
 opinion is worthless and nobody will listen to me.

No, that is not what he is saying.  You are free to have any opinion
you want, and you are free to back up that opinion with arguments and
evidence.  If your arguments and evidence are good, you may very well
convince others to go along with your ideas.

But ultimately someone or some group has to make the final decision
about what is and is not going to be included.  In the case of TDF, it
is the ESC.  The people in that group have the authority to make a
final decision.

What Italo is saying (from my reading) is that authority has to be
earned, you have to convince others that you deserve that sort of
authority.  Anyone can have an opinion, and anyone can argue that
opinion, but not everyone can make a final decision.  That is what
Italo was saying, and it isn't the least bit condescending.

In short, anyone can have an opinion, but votes are restricted to only
those who have earned it.  You haven't, so your opinion has no more
inherent value than any other random user's opinion.  You have no more
authority to dictate what LibreOffice will and will not do than me.

 As I recall, someone earlier defined the term*community*  in the context
 of*The Document Foundation*  to include all*contributors*  and
 explicitly excluded those who 'contribute' to mailing list discussions
 from this broad group.

 Then why is this list called Discuss? Isn't this the place for
 discussions? Or should we quit wasting our time giving our opinions on the
 project? After all, if we do not write code we are not contributers to the
 community and have no say in the community.

You are free to discuss, you are free to make your case, but you are
not free to force your opinion on everyone else.

-- 
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

On 03/01/11 03:17, Larry Gusaas wrote:
 That is pure condescension. He is saying that because I do not write
 code my opinion is worthless and nobody will listen to me.

That is hardly condescension, merely a statement of fact. The reality
is, that if you or I want a greater say on matters such as these, the
best way is to become a contributor proper. To do so merely demonstrates
our qualifications to speak *authoritatively* on such matters.

Furthermore, what you're arguing for is the intentional crippling of
*LibreOffice* on political grounds! I suspect that such a view, were it
expressed by God himself, would be ignored by any rational developer!

On 03/01/11 03:17, Larry Gusaas wrote:
 Then why is this list called Discuss? Isn't this the place for
 discussions? Or should we quit wasting our time giving our opinions on
 the project? After all, if we do not write code we are not contributers
 to the community and have no say in the community.

You have wholly misconstrued the meaning of my last e-mail. Yes, there
is a *core community* of contributors whose opinions, backed by the
verasity of their qualifications (as people who contribute code, GUI
designs, etc...), are given greater weight and are perhaps more likely
to reach the ears of the steering committee members. However, that
should not preclude the contributions of we layman. It simply means that
we have to *debate* our point in a well reasoned manor. Doing so
increases the probability that our ideas will *inspire* or *chime with*
those of one or more core contributors, and thus work their way up the
greasy pole to one of the committee members. Also, I suspect that many
if not all of the committee members frequent these mailing list, so if
you can argue your case well you may well influence the project albeit
in unseen ways.

However, you do need to recognise that your opinions and ideas aren't
necessarily going to chime with those of the developers. In such cases
you'll either have to *put up* (learn to code or create some mock-ups to
better illustrate your points) or *shut up*, because the reality is, no
developer is going to work on an idea if (s)he doesn't agree with it
and/or if there's no chance the steering committee is going to include
it. This is *not* condescension in any sense, it is a recognition of the
reality that not every opinion and idea can be implemented.

In the context of this thread, two arguments have been made. One that
favours interoperability for the sake of pragmatism and user experience,
and one that favours crippling *LibreOffice* for the sake of politics
and principals. In my humble opinion, the steering committee made the
correct decision; *The Document Foundation* should not be bogged down by
politics, else it'll run itself into the ground.

Kind Regards,

Lee Hyde.



On 03/01/11 03:17, Larry Gusaas wrote:
 I guess I will quit wasting my time here and go back to just giving
 support to OpenOffice.org users.


-- 
Patriotism is the last refuge of a scoundrel

-- Dr. Samuel Johnson (April 7th, 1775)


-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Zaphod Feeblejocks

Hi Sveinn,

 Sure, but how about conservation and readability by future generations 
 (when there's no more Microsoft knowledge around and nobody knows 
 anymore how to decrypt all the nuances of.doc + .docx files) ?

Fair point.

But: most users do not care.  Not exporting to Word will make it look like LibO 
is faulty.

I have to save in MSO formats to share work with others.  At work, we have an 
MSO policy.  
While I can use whatever I like on my desktop, I have to save spreadsheets in 
MSO formats 
because Excel 07 kills ODS formulae.  If I prepare a document as ODT, the few 
Word 2003 
dies-hards complain I am refusing to inter-operate.  I do still assign student 
work to be 
submitted as either .doc or .odt and mark students down for using .docx (they 
failed to read 
the instructions).  They are also marked down for not using proper spacing and 
a serif font.

I don't want to see the .docx format spread any further and advocate using ODT 
as the 
default.  However, not having the option to export as .doc and .docx will cause 
users to 
wonder if they want to promote LibO.

  It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.
  Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
  why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?
 
 Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
 Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways, 
 always, anyways...
 

Office on-the-web only saves in docx.  Office 2013/4 will quite possibly drop 
.doc export, 
just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed attempt to 
drop it 
from 2000.  MS can do this because they are the market leader.  To fail to 
offer even 
rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration. 

my thoughts anyway!

zf


-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Charles Marcus

On 2011-01-01 12:07 PM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:
 Office 2013/4 will quite possibly drop .doc export, just as Word
 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed attempt to
 drop it from 2000. MS can do this because they are the market leader.
 To fail to offer even rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's
 market penetration.

And every time Microsoft drops support for legacy formats, the fact that
LibO continues to support them will just be 'one more reason' that LibO
is 'better'... :)

-- 

Best regards,

Charles

-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Wolf Halton

LibOffice on the web would be able to export in almost any format. We are
often saying ms doesn't play well with others, and one of the benefits of
open source and open standards DO play well with others , so let's commit
to playing well with others.

Wolf Halton

PS happy new year.
On Jan 1, 2011 12:36 PM, Charles Marcus cmar...@media-brokers.com wrote:
 On 2011-01-01 12:07 PM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:
 Office 2013/4 will quite possibly drop .doc export, just as Word
 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed attempt to
 drop it from 2000. MS can do this because they are the market leader.
 To fail to offer even rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's
 market penetration.

 And every time Microsoft drops support for legacy formats, the fact that
 LibO continues to support them will just be 'one more reason' that LibO
 is 'better'... :)

 --

 Best regards,

 Charles

 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

2011-01-01 Thread Ian Lynch



 Office on-the-web only saves in docx.  Office 2013/4 will quite possibly
 drop .doc export,
 just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed
 attempt to drop it
 from 2000.  MS can do this because they are the market leader.  To fail to
 offer even
 rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration.

 my thoughts anyway


Another consideration is that if we ignore docx until MS do drop .doc which
is long term inevitable, we could end  up playing catch up in order to get
filter that are good enough to be credible.  Better to start now and
incrementally improve them over time.

--
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***




-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQ

www.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Sveinn í Felli

Þann lau 1.jan 2011 19:57, skrifaði NoOp:

On 12/31/2010 02:18 AM, Sveinn í Felli wrote:

But I think that in a corporate context, a batch program for converting
.doc and .docx to ODF would get some support and would/could ease the
conversion. After all those years, there's a pile of .docs sitting on
most PCs in this world. And having all the files in a same/similar
format is an issue for many I've heard from.

You might try:
http://www.oooninja.com/2008/01/convert-openxml-docx-etc-in-linux-using.html
[bit dated, but probably still works]

Also see:
http://katana.oooninja.com/w/odf-converter-integrator
http://katana.oooninja.com/w/odf-converter-integrator/download

Thanks, have not revisited this for a while.

Seems these convert one file at a time.

I'm more thinking about a program that could be run (maybe on first run
of LibO ?) offering to convert all MSO files to their ODF equivalents,
under same name, parsing all subfolders of a tree. Custom renaming, file
exclusions and other stuff would be nice to have, but not mandatory.

I'm more interested in something like the mso2ooo:
http://leapon.net/en/mso2ooo-batch-convert-microsoft-office-documents-openoffice-documents

The author even says that integration into OOo/LibO should be possible
(for an OOoBasic-nerd):
If someone could make the equivalent of mso2ooo.py in OpenOffice.org
Basic, it would be just one step. Or integrate mso2ooo.py in mso2ooo.odt
(OpenOffice.org documents can contain Python scripts, it’s just I can’t
do it). This also solves the problem of Python in Windows.

Best,

Sveinn

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

2011-01-01 Thread Barbara Duprey

On 1/1/2011 11:07 AM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:

Hi Sveinn,

Sure, but how about conservation and readability by future generations
(when there's no more Microsoft knowledge around and nobody knows
anymore how to decrypt all the nuances of.doc + .docx files) ?

Fair point.

But: most users do not care. Not exporting to Word will make it look like LibO
is faulty.

I have to save in MSO formats to share work with others. At work, we have an
MSO policy.
While I can use whatever I like on my desktop, I have to save spreadsheets in
MSO formats
because Excel 07 kills ODS formulae. If I prepare a document as ODT, the few
Word 2003
dies-hards complain I am refusing to inter-operate. I do still assign student
work to be
submitted as either .doc or .odt and mark students down for using .docx (they
failed to read
the instructions). They are also marked down for not using proper spacing and
a serif font.

I don't want to see the .docx format spread any further and advocate using ODT
as the
default. However, not having the option to export as .doc and .docx will cause
users to
wonder if they want to promote LibO.

I don't think anybody is saying LibO should drop .doc export -- just not try to export to the OOXML
Transitional formats. In theory, MS will go to OOXML Strict in the 2014 (or whenever) release,
and that should by then be a truly open format, if the comments submitted to the standards committee
are properly worked off. Meanwhile, exporting to the Transitional form for new documents is
specifically deprecated in the ISO standard; doing that really plays into a possible MS strategy to
continue to ignore the Strict version forever, maintaining the proprietary lock-in while claiming
to be open.

Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save but with a message clarifying
the limitations of the format (and perhaps recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with
an MS-only shop; their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable level, the older
formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least for editing documents that are received in
these formats -- I'm not convinced it should be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the
SaveAs dialog should label the format using the word Transitional. It probably makes sense to start
working towards OOXML Strict export as soon as that is a reasonably stationary target, though.
Wouldn't it be great if LibO were the first implementation compliant with the ISO standard? And if
the other FOSS implementations also headed there, we could beat MS at their own game!

Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways,
always, anyways...

Office on-the-web only saves in docx. Office 2013/4 will quite possibly drop
.doc export,
just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed attempt to
drop it
from 2000. MS can do this because they are the market leader. To fail to
offer even
rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration.

my thoughts anyway!

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

2011-01-01 Thread Andy Brown


On Sat Jan 01 2011 10:27:02 GMT-0800 (PST)  Ian Lynch wrote:



Another consideration is that if we ignore docx until MS do drop .doc which
is long term inevitable, we could end  up playing catch up in order to get
filter that are good enough to be credible.  Better to start now and
incrementally improve them over time.



How can LibO or any OSS program expect to keep up with MS when they do 
not even follow their own standard?  All that anyone has to go on is 
the standard published by the ISO but MS does not even support it as 
published.  See 
http://www.adjb.net/post/Microsoft-Fails-the-Standards-Test.aspx as 
reference.




--
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

2011-01-01 Thread Jaime R. Garza

Well, we need to be able to import those transitional OOXML (2007-2010)
formats. If we can save to them, is not really necessary, (since MS office
suites 2007  2010 support MS-Office 2003 FF too), but is a nice to have
feature. The real ISO OOXML will be implemented by MS first on MS Office
2014. By them LibreOffice must be able to import and export that
format. They will depreciate the old format MS-Office FF when they finally
implement the ISO OOXML, which is not a complete open format since it still
has a lot of proprietary hooks, but at least the base is openly specified.

Even though I think it would be nice to be able to export to the
transitional formats too, I agree that it a pain in the a But that's how
MS is playing with the Open Standards and we have to win them in their own
game.

Cheers!

Jaime R. Garza

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 23:29, Barbara Duprey b...@onr.com wrote:


 I don't think anybody is saying LibO should drop .doc export -- just not
 try to export to the OOXML Transitional formats. In theory, MS will go to
 OOXML Strict in the 2014 (or whenever) release, and that should by then be
 a truly open format, if the comments submitted to the standards committee
 are properly worked off. Meanwhile, exporting to the Transitional form for
 new documents is specifically deprecated in the ISO standard; doing that
 really plays into a possible MS strategy to continue to ignore the Strict
 version forever, maintaining the proprietary lock-in while claiming to be
 open.

 Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save but
 with a message clarifying the limitations of the format (and perhaps
 recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with an MS-only shop;
 their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable level, the
 older formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least for editing
 documents that are received in these formats -- I'm not convinced it should
 be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the SaveAs dialog should
 label the format using the word Transitional. It probably makes sense to
 start working towards OOXML Strict export as soon as that is a reasonably
 stationary target, though. Wouldn't it be great if LibO were the first
 implementation compliant with the ISO standard? And if the other FOSS
 implementations also headed there, we could beat MS at their own game!


  It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.
 Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
 why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?

 Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
 Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways,
 always, anyways...

  Office on-the-web only saves in docx.  Office 2013/4 will quite possibly
 drop .doc export,
 just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed
 attempt to drop it
 from 2000.  MS can do this because they are the market leader.  To fail to
 offer even
 rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration.

 my thoughts anyway!

 zf



 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

2011-01-01 Thread Thorsten Behrens

Larry Gusaas wrote:
 They will instead see an 'office suite' that
 doesn't support the formats they have and will go Well thats USELESS and
 delete it from their system and install an office suite which DOES have
 support,
 
 MS Office still can read and write to .doc format. LibO ability to
 write to .doc format if necessary is sufficient for interchange with
 MS office users
 
Nope, it's not. And the gap is widening. Also, nobody is gonna
write, and QA, a decent export filter for ooxml in 6 months, should
MS once axe binary support ...

Cheers,

-- Thorsten

-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Barbara Duprey

OOo and LibO already do read those formats -- it's only the capability to write them that's an
issue. The Go-OO version and its derivatives, and as a consequence now LibO, write them, and
objecting to that is what started this whole (enormous) thread. The standard as written already
deprecates the use of the Transitional standard for new documents; MS, and LibO etc., really
shouldn't do it. Do you have information that the Strict form will still include proprietary hooks?

On 1/1/2011 4:56 PM, Jaime R. Garza wrote:

Well, we need to be able to import those transitional OOXML (2007-2010)
formats. If we can save to them, is not really necessary, (since MS office
suites 2007 2010 support MS-Office 2003 FF too), but is a nice to have
feature. The real ISO OOXML will be implemented by MS first on MS Office
2014. By them LibreOffice must be able to import and export that
format. They will depreciate the old format MS-Office FF when they finally
implement the ISO OOXML, which is not a complete open format since it still
has a lot of proprietary hooks, but at least the base is openly specified.

Even though I think it would be nice to be able to export to the
transitional formats too, I agree that it a pain in the a But that's how
MS is playing with the Open Standards and we have to win them in their own
game.

Cheers!

Jaime R. Garza

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 23:29, Barbara Dupreyb...@onr.com wrote:

I don't think anybody is saying LibO should drop .doc export -- just not
try to export to the OOXML Transitional formats. In theory, MS will go to
OOXML Strict in the 2014 (or whenever) release, and that should by then be
a truly open format, if the comments submitted to the standards committee
are properly worked off. Meanwhile, exporting to the Transitional form for
new documents is specifically deprecated in the ISO standard; doing that
really plays into a possible MS strategy to continue to ignore the Strict
version forever, maintaining the proprietary lock-in while claiming to be
open.

Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save but
with a message clarifying the limitations of the format (and perhaps
recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with an MS-only shop;
their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable level, the
older formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least for editing
documents that are received in these formats -- I'm not convinced it should
be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the SaveAs dialog should
label the format using the word Transitional. It probably makes sense to
start working towards OOXML Strict export as soon as that is a reasonably
stationary target, though. Wouldn't it be great if LibO were the first
implementation compliant with the ISO standard? And if the other FOSS
implementations also headed there, we could beat MS at their own game!

It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.

Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?

Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways,
always, anyways...

Office on-the-web only saves in docx. Office 2013/4 will quite possibly

drop .doc export,
just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed
attempt to drop it
from 2000. MS can do this because they are the market leader. To fail to
offer even
rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration.

my thoughts anyway!

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@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

2011-01-01 Thread Craig A. Eddy

Barbara,

First, ODF IS the ISO standard - honestly made so without the dirty
tricks that MS used to stuff the committee and force it to approve
something that wasn't ready to be used by anyone.

Second, MS refuses to support any ODF except the one that is actually an
ISO standard.  That makes their version of ODF suspect as to its actual
compatibility.

I don't suggest using the same tactics on MS as it is using on Open
Source Software.  Doing to others as they do to you is NOT a recommended
tactic for honest people or organizations (though it's too often been
used, in my arrogant opinion [There AIN'T no such thing as a humble
opinion]).

By being able to read .doc and .docx formats LO demonstrates it's
willingness to at least reach out to MS and its customers.  Therefore,
LO ends up being the good guy.

Craig
Tyche

On 01/01/2011 03:29 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:
 On 1/1/2011 11:07 AM, Zaphod Feeblejocks wrote:
 Hi Sveinn,

 Sure, but how about conservation and readability by future generations
 (when there's no more Microsoft knowledge around and nobody knows
 anymore how to decrypt all the nuances of.doc + .docx files) ?
 Fair point.

 But: most users do not care.  Not exporting to Word will make it look
 like LibO is faulty.

 I have to save in MSO formats to share work with others.  At work, we
 have an MSO policy.
 While I can use whatever I like on my desktop, I have to save
 spreadsheets in MSO formats
 because Excel 07 kills ODS formulae.  If I prepare a document as ODT,
 the few Word 2003
 dies-hards complain I am refusing to inter-operate.  I do still assign
 student work to be
 submitted as either .doc or .odt and mark students down for using
 .docx (they failed to read
 the instructions).  They are also marked down for not using proper
 spacing and a serif font.

 I don't want to see the .docx format spread any further and advocate
 using ODT as the
 default.  However, not having the option to export as .doc and .docx
 will cause users to
 wonder if they want to promote LibO.
 
 I don't think anybody is saying LibO should drop .doc export -- just not
 try to export to the OOXML Transitional formats. In theory, MS will go
 to OOXML Strict in the 2014 (or whenever) release, and that should by
 then be a truly open format, if the comments submitted to the standards
 committee are properly worked off. Meanwhile, exporting to the
 Transitional form for new documents is specifically deprecated in the
 ISO standard; doing that really plays into a possible MS strategy to
 continue to ignore the Strict version forever, maintaining the
 proprietary lock-in while claiming to be open.
 
 Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save
 but with a message clarifying the limitations of the format (and perhaps
 recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with an MS-only
 shop; their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable
 level, the older formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least
 for editing documents that are received in these formats -- I'm not
 convinced it should be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the
 SaveAs dialog should label the format using the word Transitional. It
 probably makes sense to start working towards OOXML Strict export as
 soon as that is a reasonably stationary target, though. Wouldn't it be
 great if LibO were the first implementation compliant with the ISO
 standard? And if the other FOSS implementations also headed there, we
 could beat MS at their own game!
 
 It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.
 Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
 why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?
 Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
 Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways,
 always, anyways...

 Office on-the-web only saves in docx.  Office 2013/4 will quite
 possibly drop .doc export,
 just as Word 6/95 export was dropped from Word 2003 - after a failed
 attempt to drop it
 from 2000.  MS can do this because they are the market leader.  To
 fail to offer even
 rudimentary docx export would damage LibO's market penetration.

 my thoughts anyway!

 zf


 

-- 
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

2011-01-01 Thread Italo Vignoli


On 01/01/2011 11:29 PM, Barbara Duprey wrote:


Several of the comments here suggest a middle road, allowing the save
but with a message clarifying the limitations of the format (and perhaps
recommending use of the XP formats if interoperating with an MS-only
shop; their ODF support is not truly interoperable at a reasonable
level, the older formats come closer). That seems reasonable, at least
for editing documents that are received in these formats -- I'm not
convinced it should be allowed for new work, though. At the least, the
SaveAs dialog should label the format using the word Transitional. It
probably makes sense to start working towards OOXML Strict export as
soon as that is a reasonably stationary target, though. Wouldn't it be
great if LibO were the first implementation compliant with the ISO
standard? And if the other FOSS implementations also headed there, we
could beat MS at their own game!


Standards support is a thorny field. The reality is that no one supports 
a standard by default, but only with a specific choice in configuration 
(including LibreOffice with ODF, as 1.2 is not yet the standard format 
and 1.2 Extended is not going to be a standard).


Supporting OOXML Strict today would make LO not compatible with MS 
Office, and users do want interoperability and not just standard compliance.


--
Italo Vignoli - The Document Foundation
E-mail: italo.vign...@documentfoundation.org
Mobile +39.348.5653829 - VoIP: +39.02.320621813
Skype: italovignoli - GTalk: italo.vign...@gmail.com

--
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

2010-12-31 Thread Sean White

@Larry Gusaas
During the last 12 months alot of of big businesses have changed over to
Windows 7 and MSO 2007/2010.  As most people dont care about the format they
will just save it as docx.  Most will not even know the difference because
they will buy the software that their business has.  LibreOffice being able
to write to .doc isn't going to be enough when everyone around you is using
the format equivalent of Win7 and you're still using the equivalent of
Win98/2000.

The vibe i got from the original poster and a few subsequent posters was
that of stopping support entirely, both read and write, rather than just
write.

gStreamer is a de-facto media framework.  Some programs you use everyday
probably use it.  If my use of gStreamer was to hard for you then replace it
with FFMpeg.  It achieves the same objective.  And dont just think that
because i know a few computer terms that you don't that I run Linux.  Not
every smart person uses it even though it is a better system than Windows.
 The reason it fails is really the same as why OOo/LO struggle against MSO,
people dont see it as a viable alternative.  In linux's case its because
people think that it HAS to be advanced and that it isn't user friendly.  In
OOo/LO's case people see that it doesn't have the features they need (.docx
support) and, camparative to MSO, looks a-shambles, with a GUI akin to the
MSO 97-2003 era.

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 6:36 PM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.comwrote:


 On 2010/12/31 1:02 AM  Sean White wrote:

 IF
 LibreOffice pulls .docx support then people WONT congratulate us on the
 strength of our morals.


 Nobody suggest not being able to read .docx files, only that LibO should no
 be able to write to that format.


  They will instead see an 'office suite' that
 doesn't support the formats they have and will go Well thats USELESS and
 delete it from their system and install an office suite which DOES have
 support,


 MS Office still can read and write to .doc format. LibO ability to write to
 .doc format if necessary is sufficient for interchange with MS office users


  we happen to support a format that is used by 80+% of all 'Office Suite'
 users.


 Older versions of MS office do not use the new formats. Many users of MS
 Office 2007 and newer still save in the older formats. Nowhere near 80+% of
 MS Office users the new file formats.


  Its kinda like going to the gStreamer forums and saying I'm going
 to iTunes because you support WMA.


 Totally irrelevant comment. What is gStreamer? Oh, wait a minute, it is
 probably a Linuts program.

 Larry
 --
 _
 Larry I. Gusaas
 Moose Jaw, Saskatchewan Canada
 Website: http://larry-gusaas.com
 An artist is never ahead of his time but most people are far behind
 theirs. - Edgard Varese



 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***




-- 
Sean White,
I've Seen the Cow Level

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Rob Unsworth


On 31/12/10 07:07, Larry Gusaas wrote:
You have it backward. If LibO writes in OOXML they are doing 
Microsofts bidiing. The world is slowly demanding open document 
formats. By supporting MS proprietary formats LibO is helping to 
perpetuate their hegemony.


If LibreOffice were to write in OOXML it would be supporting MS by 
giving them another implementation of the current OOXML format. There is 
also a distinct possibility that LbreOffice would loose credibility 
within the open source community.


Before anyone spends any more time on LibreOffice writing in the OOXML 
format I would suggest you read these two articles.


http://arstechnica.com/microsoft/news/2010/04/iso-ooxml-convener-microsofts-format-heading-for-failure.ars

From Alex Brown, the convener of ISO's OOXML subcommittee
http://www.adjb.net/post/Microsoft-Fails-the-Standards-Test.aspx

--
Rob Unsworth



--
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

2010-12-31 Thread Simon Brouwer


Sean White schreef:
 Oracle who are in a bigger campaign of open-source destruction than MS
is at the moment,

I know some anti-Oracle sentiment can be expected here, but seriously...

-- 
Vriendelijke groet,
Simon Brouwer
-*- nl.openoffice.org -*- http://www.opentaal.org -*-


-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker


On 30/12/10 20:41, Larry Gusaas wrote:


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.





None of you get the point, do you.
1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that 
which was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the 
same format in which the original message was received)


2. Changing the format may well lose formatting in the document that is 
not supported in the older document type.


3. .doc, .xls and .ppt  are Microsoft proprietary formats anyway - it's 
just that they are much easier to analyse...


--
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:07, Gordon Burgess-Parker gbpli...@gmail.com wrote:

 1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that which
 was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the same format
 in which the original message was received)

I agree. And users will wonder why they can open a document they
received, make some simple changes, but are asked for different name
when saving the file. They will say why can't this program simply
save my changes?.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread M. Fioretti

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:07:30 AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker
(gbpli...@gmail.com) wrote:

 None of you get the point, do you.
 1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
 which was sent to you.

arrogant my foot. If somebody smokes in my face it is not arrogant to
tell him/her to stop. It is my right, period.

For the very same reason, if people send you a document in a
proprietary format you are not arrogant to complain, you would be
wrong to _not_ complain. What is arrogant is sending proprietary
formats when you could avoid it, even after others have explained how
wrong it is.

Then of course, keep tolerating and using a proprietary format may be
still practically _unavoidable_ in many cases, no question about it. I
am in several of those cases myself.

But it would be really wrong to always do this by _default_, without
even trying to inform who is doing it that they ARE OBJECTIVELY WRONG
and that they should stop, because they're creating problems to
themselves and every other user of the files they produce, by using
formats that give cocain-like addiction:

http://stop.zona-m.net/?p=367

 (That's why email clients always reply in the same format in which
 the original message was received)

wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example, and even in Thunderbird this
is an option, not an always on uncheangeble behavior. And EVEN if it
were true, it would be a wrong comparison, because with email the
choice is between formats that are both open (plain text or HTML).


Marco F.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Gordon Burgess-Parker


On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:


wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,


Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is 
TOTALLY ARROGANT?
If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because YOU 
want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.


--
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

2010-12-31 Thread yahoo-pier_andreit

Il 31/12/2010 11:32, M. Fioretti ha scritto:
 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 10:07:30 AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker
 (gbpli...@gmail.com) wrote:
 
 None of you get the point, do you.
 1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
 which was sent to you.
 
 arrogant my foot. If somebody smokes in my face it is not arrogant to
 tell him/her to stop. It is my right, period.
 

yes it is your right, but to not be smoked on your face is seen as your
right by others (even if other is your boss), but to send a document
in another format (mainly if the receiver is your boss or customer)
isn't seen as your right

 For the very same reason, if people send you a document in a
 proprietary format you are not arrogant to complain, you would be
 wrong to _not_ complain. What is arrogant is sending proprietary
 formats when you could avoid it, even after others have explained how
 wrong it is.
 
 Then of course, keep tolerating and using a proprietary format may be
 still practically _unavoidable_ in many cases, no question about it. I
 am in several of those cases myself.
 
 But it would be really wrong to always do this by _default_, without
 even trying to inform who is doing it that they ARE OBJECTIVELY WRONG
 and that they should stop, because they're creating problems to
 themselves and every other user of the files they produce, by using
 formats that give cocain-like addiction:
 



 http://stop.zona-m.net/?p=367
 
 (That's why email clients always reply in the same format in which
 the original message was received)
 
 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example, and even in Thunderbird this
 is an option, not an always on uncheangeble behavior. And EVEN if it
 were true, it would be a wrong comparison, because with email the
 choice is between formats that are both open (plain text or HTML).
 
 
 Marco F.
 


-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Ian Lynch

On 31 December 2010 11:35, Gordon Burgess-Parker gbpli...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:


 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,


 Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is TOTALLY
 ARROGANT?
 If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because YOU
 want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.


It's more likely just that the replier didn't think it was a big deal ;-)

I don't think that most people that send me .docs are arrogant. Ignorant
perhaps. Personally I don't see why there is such a big hang up about HTML
in e-mails since web based mail is now very common and it is an open
standard.


-- 
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***




-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQwww.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Ian Lynch

On 31 December 2010 10:37, Kevin André hyperquan...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:07, Gordon Burgess-Parker gbpli...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
 which
  was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the same
 format
  in which the original message was received)

 I agree. And users will wonder why they can open a document they
 received, make some simple changes, but are asked for different name
 when saving the file. They will say why can't this program simply
 save my changes?.


You can get away with being arrogant when you have 80% of the market.  Most
of the people using a WP have no idea about file formats, they will assume
if it comes in as  it needs to go out as . (Actually a lot will
never even have used save as..) If there is no facility to do this there is
a reasonable chance they will reject the use of the software out of hand.
This isn't about logic to a sophisticated computer user, it is about the
average user who has no technical knowledge and has picked up a WP by trial
and error. MS by luck or judgement have been very good at exploiting
ignorance. School systems don't teach word processing, they teach MS Word.
It's why we need better education and a certification programme for users
that covers stuff like file formats and the principles of WP not just one
product.

--
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@documentfoundation.org
 Archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
 *** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


-- 
Ian

Ofqual Accredited IT Qualifications
The Schools ITQwww.theINGOTs.org +44 (0)1827 305940

You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.

-- 
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:51, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 31 December 2010 10:37, Kevin André hyperquan...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:07, Gordon Burgess-Parker gbpli...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
 which
  was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the same
 format
  in which the original message was received)

 I agree. And users will wonder why they can open a document they
 received, make some simple changes, but are asked for different name
 when saving the file. They will say why can't this program simply
 save my changes?.


 You can get away with being arrogant when you have 80% of the market.

Right. But LibreOffice doesn't have that kind of market share...

 Most
 of the people using a WP have no idea about file formats, they will assume
 if it comes in as  it needs to go out as . (Actually a lot will
 never even have used save as..) If there is no facility to do this there is
 a reasonable chance they will reject the use of the software out of hand.

Indeed. I argued that forcing users to save an OOXML document in
another format is something that users will not understand at first,
and they probably won't like it either.
As for the save as, with the read-only OOXML policy they will see a
dialog appear that they only expect to see when saving a brand new
document (that has no filename yet) or when explicitly doing save
as.

 This isn't about logic to a sophisticated computer user, it is about the
 average user who has no technical knowledge and has picked up a WP by trial
 and error.

And that is why I think it's a bad idea to have the application do
something they do not expect.

 MS by luck or judgement have been very good at exploiting
 ignorance. School systems don't teach word processing, they teach MS Word.
 It's why we need better education and a certification programme for users
 that covers stuff like file formats and the principles of WP not just one
 product.

Better education for users would be the optimal solution, but it's not
something you can force to happen. And it will not 'fix' all those
people that already got their 'education' in the past.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Olivier Hallot


Hi Gordon

Em 31-12-2010 08:07, Gordon Burgess-Parker escreveu:

On 30/12/10 20:41, Larry Gusaas wrote:


On 2010/12/30 2:19 PM Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:




(snip)

None of you get the point, do you.
1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
which was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the
same format in which the original message was received)


Actually I am more pragmatic. I do ask myself who *signs* the check, and 
how many digits it bears. Then I choose the file format I have to work. :-)


--
Olivier Hallot
Founder, Steering Commitee Member - The Document Foundation
Voicing the enterprise
Translation Leader for Brazilian Portuguese

--
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

2010-12-31 Thread RGB ES

A possible compromise???: move all (I mean ALL) non native formats to
the Export menu and let save/save as for the native formats only.
Also, disable the possibility to change the default format for saving
documents: in my experience on forums, many problems are fixed when
you explain users that it is not good idea to use ms formats to
_store_ files, that they need to use ODF to store and export only when
needed.

2010/12/31 Kevin André hyperquan...@gmail.com:
 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:51, Ian Lynch ianrly...@gmail.com wrote:
 On 31 December 2010 10:37, Kevin André hyperquan...@gmail.com wrote:

 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:07, Gordon Burgess-Parker gbpli...@gmail.com
 wrote:

  1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
 which
  was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the same
 format
  in which the original message was received)

 I agree. And users will wonder why they can open a document they
 received, make some simple changes, but are asked for different name
 when saving the file. They will say why can't this program simply
 save my changes?.


 You can get away with being arrogant when you have 80% of the market.

 Right. But LibreOffice doesn't have that kind of market share...

 Most
 of the people using a WP have no idea about file formats, they will assume
 if it comes in as  it needs to go out as . (Actually a lot will
 never even have used save as..) If there is no facility to do this there is
 a reasonable chance they will reject the use of the software out of hand.

 Indeed. I argued that forcing users to save an OOXML document in
 another format is something that users will not understand at first,
 and they probably won't like it either.
 As for the save as, with the read-only OOXML policy they will see a
 dialog appear that they only expect to see when saving a brand new
 document (that has no filename yet) or when explicitly doing save
 as.

 This isn't about logic to a sophisticated computer user, it is about the
 average user who has no technical knowledge and has picked up a WP by trial
 and error.

 And that is why I think it's a bad idea to have the application do
 something they do not expect.

 MS by luck or judgement have been very good at exploiting
 ignorance. School systems don't teach word processing, they teach MS Word.
 It's why we need better education and a certification programme for users
 that covers stuff like file formats and the principles of WP not just one
 product.

 Better education for users would be the optimal solution, but it's not
 something you can force to happen. And it will not 'fix' all those
 people that already got their 'education' in the past.

 --
 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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 15:31, RGB ES rgb.m...@gmail.com wrote:
 A possible compromise???: move all (I mean ALL) non native formats to
 the Export menu and let save/save as for the native formats only.
 Also, disable the possibility to change the default format for saving
 documents: in my experience on forums, many problems are fixed when
 you explain users that it is not good idea to use ms formats to
 _store_ files, that they need to use ODF to store and export only when
 needed.

There are still people who can actually use OOo instead of MSO,
because of the option to change the default format.

I would suggest the following instead. Support OOXML completely, but
when the user saves his/her document in a proprietary format display a
confirmation message which says something like: You are saving your
file in a proprietary format. We cannot guarantee that the file will
still open correctly in another program. Please use an open file
format for saving your document if possible. Are you still sure you
wish to save in the current format? And display a checkbox below that
can disable the message, or maybe add a note You can disable this
message by going to Options-. and have no checkbox at all. And
the message would appear by default even for the binary MS formats
(.doc, .xls, .ppt, ...).

MS Office does the same thing when saving in ODF format, and they seem
to lack an option to disable the message, even when the document to be
saved uses only features that are completely supported by ODF.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Steven Shelton


-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
 
On 12/31/2010 10:03 AM, Kevin André wrote:
 I would suggest the following instead. Support OOXML completely,
 but when the user saves his/her document in a proprietary format
 display a confirmation message which says something like: You are
 saving your file in a proprietary format. We cannot guarantee that
 the file will still open correctly in another program. Please use
 an open file format for saving your document if possible. Are you
 still sure you wish to save in the current format? And display a
 checkbox below that can disable the message, or maybe add a note
 You can disable this message by going to Options-. and have
 no checkbox at all. And the message would appear by default even
 for the binary MS formats (.doc, .xls, .ppt, ...).

This is a much better idea. However, I should note that even ODF
files--despite the hype--are not 100% on preserving formatting when
moved from one application to another. I have my letterhead saved as
ODF done in OOo, but when I open it in AbiWord the formatting is all
over the place.


- -- 
Steven Shelton
Deputy Undersecretary for Made-up Titles
-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (MingW32)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/
 
iEYEARECAAYFAk0eAVIACgkQO+AD2HqgRoAjEQCgtP6N89BiTGWq+bUaO+rgfsmt
LJcAn0j5u5MRhvhlxLtUWjZVVO6L1Yh7
=hFE0
-END PGP SIGNATURE-


-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread yahoo-pier_andreit

Il 31/12/2010 15:31, RGB ES ha scritto:
 A possible compromise???: move all (I mean ALL) non native formats to
 the Export menu and let save/save as for the native formats only.
 Also, disable the possibility to change the default format for saving
 documents: in my experience on forums, many problems are fixed when
 you explain users that it is not good idea to use ms formats to
 _store_ files, that they need to use ODF to store and export only when
 needed.

very good idea:-) +1

-- 
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 17:14, Steven Shelton ste...@sheltonlegal.net wrote:

 On 12/31/2010 10:03 AM, Kevin André wrote:
 I would suggest the following instead. Support OOXML completely,
 but when the user saves his/her document in a proprietary format
 display a confirmation message which says something like: You are
 saving your file in a proprietary format. We cannot guarantee that
 the file will still open correctly in another program. Please use
 an open file format for saving your document if possible. Are you
 still sure you wish to save in the current format? And display a
 checkbox below that can disable the message, or maybe add a note
 You can disable this message by going to Options-. and have
 no checkbox at all. And the message would appear by default even
 for the binary MS formats (.doc, .xls, .ppt, ...).

 This is a much better idea. However, I should note that even ODF
 files--despite the hype--are not 100% on preserving formatting when
 moved from one application to another. I have my letterhead saved as
 ODF done in OOo, but when I open it in AbiWord the formatting is all
 over the place.

I know. But users need to be informed, even if it's with a short
message that is not 100 percent accurate.
Maybe a longer explanation could be provided in a help file or
something, and then provide a reference to it from the short message.

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Paul Gress

On 12/31/10 05:07 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

On 30/12/10 20:41, Larry Gusaas wrote:

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.

None of you get the point, do you.
1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that which was
sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the same format in which
the original message was received)

It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support. Also, if
the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in, why does it matter
if it's returned to them in a .doc format?

2. Changing the format may well lose formatting in the document that is not
supported in the older document type.

Changing the format is inevitable. Libreoffice and OOo converts it to ODF when
it opens/imports the docx. When you save that document as a .doc file
Libreoffice and OOo simply export it to that format. There are two conversion,
opening and saving. As I stated previously, saving to .docx will not be as
accurate as saving to .doc until it matures.

3. .doc, .xls and .ppt are Microsoft proprietary formats anyway - it's just
that they are much easier to analyse...

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

2010-12-31 Thread Carl Symons

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Larry Gusaas larry.gus...@gmail.com wrote:

 On 2010/12/31 12:15 PM  Carl Symons wrote:

 On Thu, Dec 30, 2010 at 5:54 PM, Paul Gresspgr...@optonline.net  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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format

2010-12-31 Thread Sveinn í Felli


Þann fös 31.des 2010 17:04, skrifaði Paul Gress:

On 12/31/10 05:07 AM, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:

On 30/12/10 20:41, Larry Gusaas wrote:


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.


Sure, but how about conservation and readability by future generations 
(when there's no more Microsoft knowledge around and nobody knows 
anymore how to decrypt all the nuances of.doc + .docx files) ?




None of you get the point, do you.
1. It is arrogant to return a document in a format different to that
which was sent to you. (That's why email clients always reply in the
same format in which the original message was received)



---

It must be arrogant for them to send you a format you don't support.
Also, if the Win 7 users don't know what format the documents are in,
why does it matter if it's returned to them in a .doc format?

--

Think you hit the nail on the head, pal.
Those who ignore any notion of a file format, will do it both ways, 
always, anyways...


Best regards,

Sveinn í Felli

--
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:35:24AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
 On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:
 
 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,
 
 Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is
 TOTALLY ARROGANT?
 If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because
 YOU want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.

No..what's arrogant is insisting I use an MUA that supports HTML
just so I can reply in the same format to some ignorant jerk who sends
me a circus poster for an email.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer

-- 
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:35:24AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
 On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:
 
 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,
 
 Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is
 TOTALLY ARROGANT?
 If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because
 YOU want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.

Nowhat's arrogant is someone insisting I use an MUA that
supports HTML just so I can reply in kind to some clueless jerk who sent
me a circus poster for an email.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer

-- 
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

On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:35:24AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
 On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:
 
 wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,
 
 Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is
 TOTALLY ARROGANT?
 If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because
 YOU want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.

Please excuse the double reply to this post. It was inadvertent.

-- 
Bob Holtzman
Key ID: 8D549279
If you think you're getting free lunch,
 check the price of the beer

-- 
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

2010-12-31 Thread Jaime R. Garza

Sorry to get into the discussion, but what are your goals, to be arrogant,
or not? Or to make ODF the defacto standard which saddly is still NOT? The
important thing is to fulfill the needs from potential users, specially in
the enterprise. *e.g. *E-mail composers in the enterprise usually support
text, RTF and HTML, and will automatically reply in the same format, why?
Because enterprise users need to support all market standards! The same
applies for File Formats, the enterprise users need to support the
maket-share leaders, and even though we don't like it, the market leaders
are still MS File Formats. It's not about being arrogant, or making a point,
is about winning market-share, and if we don't understand that, we already
lost the race.

Cheers!

Jaime R. Garza

On Sat, Jan 1, 2011 at 01:10, Robert Holtzman hol...@cox.net wrote:

 On Fri, Dec 31, 2010 at 11:35:24AM +, Gordon Burgess-Parker wrote:
  On 31/12/10 10:32, M. Fioretti wrote:
  
  wrong. Mine (mutt) doesn't for example,
 
  Then I would plonk you immediately. How do you not see that that is
  TOTALLY ARROGANT?
  If I send you an email in plain text and you reply in HTML, because
  YOU want to, that is complete rudeness and intolerance.

 Please excuse the double reply to this post. It was inadvertent.

 --
 Bob Holtzman
 Key ID: 8D549279
 If you think you're getting free lunch,
  check the price of the beer

 --
 Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to 
 discuss+h...@documentfoundation.orgdiscuss%2bh...@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] Re: Do not support writing to OOXML format