Re: How far can the LO file's contents be stretched?

On 08/02/12 10:16, Michael Meeks wrote:
> On Mon, 2012-02-06 at 23:32 +0100, Michael Stahl wrote:
> > flat ODF filters don't support all features of package-based ODF (which
> > is i guess the reason why OOo never shipped a flat ODF filter out of the
> > box); also your images and embedded objects will blow up considerably in
> > size due to base64 encoding.
>
>       Que ? really ? why is that ? base64 encoding should increase the size
> of a binary object or image by only 30% or so - surely ?

well i'd say 30% counts as "significantly" for a file format (plus of
course the XML content is not compressed, and that stuff tends to
compress quite well).

>       I was labouring under the impression that these were semantically and
> content-wise identical - why should that not be so ? :-)

there are various features that require packages (encryption,
signatures), some that could perhaps be made to work with flat files if
somebody would put in the effort to work out how (RDF metadata), and
some that could almost certainly work but just aren't implemented (e.g.
embedded media files in LO 3.5).

>       All the best,
>
>               Michael.