Cor Nouws wrote: Hi all,
>>> 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. The most pressing reason is this issue http://www.openoffice.org/issues/show_bug.cgi?id=72559 Of course one could still get rid of that dictionary.lst and still use the plain files of the dictionary. Currently for example I think Caolan is doing this for the Fedora build by using the file names itself to retrieve the respective locales. There are about 3 reasons to use extension for dictionaries as well. - Extensions are already an existing and widely excepted mechanism to add (and later on also remove!) extra functionality to OOo. Just have a look at the number of extensions in the download pages. Why have a different one as well? Extensions provide most useful extra functionality namely - Versioning of the extension and because of that - it is possible to automatically check for updates Regards, Thomas --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
