Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2014 Archives by date, by thread · List index

On 19/03/2014, Owen Genat <> wrote:

For those interested, these can be found in the  ODF Implementor Notes

Thank you. It is a worry that 17 out of 24 "features" are in fact
devoted to "interoperability" with m$. Seems to prove the hypothesis
that making LO a poor-man's m$-clone detracts from standards
compliance. The web page indicates that because development of
standards is (necessarily) slow, it is sensible for LO to break odf
validation by default. This is a very surprising conclusion for an
open software product; to adopt the m$ embrace, extend, extinguish
policy and leave standards development to "catch up". Any m$ fan
should be laughing at the strategic folly of LO...

So, new users to LO, be _very_ _very_ aware: LO documents by default
are not standards compliant, which minimises the possibility that such
documents created by LO in default mode will be accessible by other
(including future LO?) odf-compliant products.

To unsubscribe e-mail to:
Posting guidelines + more:
List archive:
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: 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.