Am 08.09.2011 00:07, e-letter wrote:
Would be interested to hear your explanation why other m$ formats are _not_ against the interests of LO (i.e. increased _visible_ usage of odt. Using LO to write m$ formats should be considered invisible usage, of what benefit exactly?).
If not for collaboration, there needs to be a bridge leading from their file formats to free file formats. The binary formats are well known by the ODF developers since the early days of StarOffice. The feature set of this office suite is adjusted to the feature set of MS Office, so both file formats can describe the same documents (more or less). MS introduced their new OOXML to expand that commonly used feature set and because they too want something with "Office" and "Open" and "XML" in the name. ODF applications should support the same set of features before writing OOXML, but wait --- do we really want that a new round in this rat race?
-- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@global.libreoffice.org Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
