From: Dennis E. Hamilton <email@example.com>
To: 'Robert Funnell' <firstname.lastname@example.org>; email@example.com
Sent: Wednesday, 19 December 2012, 23:19
Subject: RE: [libreoffice-users] record changes weakness compared to m$
I trust there's no surprise that the OASIS Standard ODF documents are developed and maintained as
ODF documents. Tracked changes are critical to the work of the ODF TC and the review processes
that the work goes through.
There is a subcommittee of the OASIS ODF TC working on extension/replacement of the tracked changes
features for ODF 1.3. That is in response to those who find the limitations of the current
standard and its implementations unacceptable. This requirement seems to emerge from users in
public administration, somewhat akin to the use in law firms.
From: Robert Funnell [mailto:firstname.lastname@example.org]
Sent: Wednesday, December 19, 2012 13:55
Subject: Re: [libreoffice-users] record changes weakness compared to m$
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Felmon Davis wrote:
On Wed, 19 Dec 2012, Bobby kneisel wrote:
Unfortunately, where I work, this feature is used heavily ( and yest it is
really, really annoying) but is considered a must have for our
I wouldn't call it 'must-have' in my environment (academic) yet but I am very
frequently confronted with it, e.g. today a colleague offered to a document
back to me with 'changes' on; I reminded him I can't work well that way.
in my case, I also don't _like_ the feature. so much the worse for me.
For what it's worth, I'm in an academic environment and I use the
record-changes feature heavily with students, collaborators and
colleagues, some of whom use LO/OO but most of whom use MS Word and
.doc files. I use LO/OO myself and usually don't have problems, except
sometimes when there are lots of figures and equations. This has
improved over time. I love record-changes and would be lost without