Re: (off-topic) Re: [libreoffice-accessibility] IAccessible2 / LibreOffice / OpenOffice.org

Hi :)
A vague idea about possibly making money is not a clear objective.  It lacks detail, time-scales, 
quantities and crucially it lacks urgency.  

Isn't IBM Symphony based on OOo?  So if OOo is being actively and aggressively developed then 
Symphony gains?  Otherwise IBM would have to do all the development itself (or re-base to LO).  

Accessibility and Equality issues are making it into legislation in various countries and 
requirements that corporate organisations have to at least pretend to comply with.  So, if the 
transfer of code is delayed then it makes OOo less viable for corporate clients.  

Regards from
Tom :)

--- On Fri, 9/9/11, Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be> wrote:

From: Christophe Strobbe <christophe.strobbe@esat.kuleuven.be>
Subject: (off-topic) Re: [libreoffice-accessibility] IAccessible2 / LibreOffice / OpenOffice.org
To: accessibility@global.libreoffice.org
Date: Friday, 9 September, 2011, 14:17


At 12:06 9-9-2011, Tom Davies wrote:
> Hi :)
> I think IBM have a lot of power in this relationship.  If Oracle are being slow about passing 
> IBMs contribution to Apache then i think IBM might be able to make that happen faster.

I have no evidence that anyone is deliberately being slow. It may simply be a matter of resources 
that can be used for it. (But I admit I was beginning to lose my patience.)


> I heard that Oracle and Apache are in court fighting each other at the moment or fairly recently 
> about things that are nothing to do with OOo.  Oracle seemed to be just playing with OOo without 
> any really clear objectives other than just trying to make money from it somehow.  They seemed to 
> treat it as though it was a mill-stone around their neck because of it's OpenSource part.

Making money is a very clear objective, if you ask me ;-)
Not making enough money was why Sun got acquired by Oracle in the first place. (Sun also asked IBM 
if they wanted to buy them, but IBM said no.)


> Apache have a strong passion for  projects that are at least partly OpenSource.  IBM seems to 
> need OOo to be developed with strength and determination to be strongly viable against MS Office 
> rather than just being allowed to crumble.

Straying off topic once more ;-) :
> From IBM's point of view, which office suite should have been that competitor? OpenOffice.org, IBM 
> Lotus Symphony or both? IBM has an "IBM Lotus Symphony Savings Calculator" at
<http://www-03.ibm.com/software/lotus/symphony/ROICalc.nsf/mainForm>.
Not buying MS Office licenses for its 400,000 employees (or a bit less if you count only those who 
need an office suite) probably saves IBM enough money to finance OpenOffice.org / IBM Lotus 
Symphony development.


> So it seems that IBM were able to push Oracle into handing OOo to Apache who are not struggling 
> as much as Oracle possibly hoped.  Perhaps delaying the transfer of IBM's gift is the most they 
> can do to make things difficult for Apache?  Maybe IBM has some leverage there?

Delaying the IAccessible2 code (if that is what is happening; we don't really know that; and Dennis 
Hamilton sent us a URL to the Mercurial CWS'es where that code may be available) does not benefit 
Oracle or create difficulties for Apache, as far as I can tell. The only victims would be people 
with disabilities on Windows who want to use a free and/or open source office suite, and this group 
is not involved in the lawsuit between Oracle and Apache.

Best regards,

Christophe

> Regards from
> Tom :)
>
>
> --- On Fri, 9/9/11, Christopher Chaltain <chaltain@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> From: Christopher Chaltain <chaltain@gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [libreoffice-accessibility] IAccessible2 / LibreOffice / OpenOffice.org
> To: accessibility@global.libreoffice.org
> Date: Friday, 9 September, 2011, 3:46
>
> I haven't looked into this issue as much as others, but what's left here
> for IBM to do? It sounds like they've already donated the code. BTW, who
> in IBM did you contact? I used to know some of the guys working on
> accessibility inside IBM.
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to accessibility+help@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/accessibility/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- Christophe Strobbe
K.U.Leuven - Dept. of Electrical Engineering - SCD
Research Group on Document Architectures
Kasteelpark Arenberg 10 bus 2442
B-3001 Leuven-Heverlee
BELGIUM
tel: +32 16 32 85 51
http://www.docarch.be/
Twitter: @RabelaisA11y
---
Open source for accessibility: results from the AEGIS project www.aegis-project.eu
---
Please don't invite me to Facebook, Quechup or other "social networks". You may have agreed to 
their "privacy policy", but I haven't.


-- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to accessibility+help@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/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to accessibility+help@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/accessibility/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted