2008/5/17 Cor Nouws <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > David Lowe wrote (17-5-2008 5:05) > >> On May 16, 2008, at 09:55 , jonathon wrote: >> >> Their won't be an install dictionary Wizard for OOo 3.0. >>> >>> If the creator of the dictionary doesn't program it as an OOo >>> extension, there will be no dictionary. >>> >> >> Is there a rationale given for why the OOo team is turning their backs >> on these freely available dictionaries? Refusing to recognize a commonly >> available file format is too much reminiscent of the behavior of certain non >> open source programs i can think of... >> > > I don't know details exactly just out of my head. But there were problems > with the old process (updating OOo caused need for reïnstalling dics). And > the OOo installation changes in 3.0. Plus the ease of using extensions. > So my guess is that in common discussion the new solution is found best. > And btw it won't be difficult to present dics as an extension. >
Will someone in the OOo development team please take the time to ensure that all the existing dictionaries are available in the appropriate form from day 1? If not, there will be justified howls of protest about regressive "upgrades" - the sort of thing one has come to expect from the major commercial software houses; not from the open source movement. Also, and more important, the OOo development team seems to have solved the wrong problem. You say "But there were problems with the old process (updating OOo caused need for reïnstalling dics).". The problem is *not* with the Wizard, it's with the OOo installation process. Instead of removing the wizard why not change the installation process so that dictionaries are put somewhere that a new version can easily find? -- Harold Fuchs London, England Please reply *only* to [email protected]
