On Wed, Aug 27, 2008 at 12:41, W. Wayne Liauh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I don't doubt the superiority of LaTex/Framemaker in conjunction with > Distiller in producing nicely typeset books and brochures. But how good is a > tool if it produces a product that its intended users can NOT read? This is > what prompted me to start this thread--and I really regret that I brought > this issue up. I know this problem is being solved, but can someone > guarantee me that this will never happen again? The problem is not in those products, but in the PDF reader. If you'd like to suggest that an alternative viewer be included, that would be a reasonable suggestion. Changing the implementation which generates the documents (which Sun controls) to fix a problem on the display end (which Sun also controls) is a silly idea. Fix the viewer and the problem is solved. Switching to OOo would not guarantee anything.
> Second, Sun is claiming, according to its CEO, to be transferring itself into > an open source powerhouse. How does the act of refusing to use an open > source product which is perhaps 90~95% as good but can be iteratively > improved, impact someone like myself who wants to believe everything Sun said? LaTeX [1] and OpenJade (a DocBook implementation) are also open source. To use OOo instead just because it's Sun's project would smack of NIH syndrome [2] to me. Will [1]: http://www.latex-project.org/lppl/lppl-1-3c.html [2]: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Not_Invented_Here _______________________________________________ zfs-discuss mailing list zfs-discuss@opensolaris.org http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/zfs-discuss
