Have done a bug report on both LO and AOO, about the 'changes' feature
of the word processor. (It's excellent that there are multiple
products available to produce ODF files, but I digress). There are
many bugs concerning this feature, which is surprising.
In the typical collaborative environment, the superior functionality
of m$ "track changes" makes the possibility to use LO unrealistic.
Suppose LO is used to create an original odt document (the preferred
option of course). When that file is distributed to m$ users, the
functionality of 'changes' in LO will probably be considered to be
weak and people will be justified to ask: "please send an m$ word
What is the experience of others distributing odt documents to m$ users?
Alternatively, the "realpolitik" option is to use LO to create an m$
word document, but as commented before, such an option merely
perpetuates the proliferation of m$ at the direct cost to odf.
Which leads to the next question: is the priority to improve the
feature of LO such that 'changes' in odt format is superior to 'track
changes' in m$ and that when odt documents are distributed, m$ users
can perform simple tasks such as recording document changes?
Or is the priority for LO to be compatible with m$, so that m$ word
continues to be the de facto standard?
For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: email@example.com
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
- [libreoffice-users] record changes weakness compared to m$ · e-letter
Impressum (Legal Info)
: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images
on this website are licensed under the
Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License
This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is
licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2
"LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are
registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are
in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective
logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use
thereof is explained in our trademark policy