Re: [libreoffice-users] status of "macro in ODF" interoperability?

Hi :)
I feel that going with Extensions is better than doing macros.  It seems to
affect LO in a more general way rather than 1 document at a time.  It gives
an opportunity to submit the code to the main branch for possible adoption
for everyone.  It sounds like it might be easier to modify the code to fit
into other office suites or programs.

Macros seem kinda the MS way of thinking and doing things.  It seems
designed to lock people in and limits sharing by creating things that are a
bit proprietary and somewhat brittle.

On the other hand have a quick way of just recording actions and then being
able to replay those actions easily seems like quite a good thing to do but
there are inherent flaws in that sort of idea anyway.  It would really need
someone to go through the coding to make sure there are no obvious blunders
or ill-considered actions that are likely to cause harm in a different
context.

Most of the experts with macros seem to say the best way of using them is
with as light a touch as possible and use them as minimally as possible.
There are bound to be times when things can only be done by using a macro
or when it's temporarily a good idea but that doesn't mean it's always the
best way!

If people really just want to do everything the MS way but have a kinda
cheap MS clone then they are really missing out on a lot of the wealth of
opportunity that OpenSource offers.
Regards from
Tom :)







On 25 July 2014 08:17, M. Fioretti <mfioretti@nexaima.net> wrote:

> On Fri, Jul 25, 2014 02:25:29 AM -0400, Andrew Douglas Pitonyak wrote:
> > On 07/23/2014 11:40 AM, M. Fioretti wrote:
>
> > that is supported (roughly speaking although not totally accurate). This
> > part of the language means things such as "how do I wrote a loop". Then
> you
> > have the part of "how do I control a specific word processor". The part
> that
> > you use to control the word processor is very specific to LO internals.
> The
> > language itself does not provide a means to manipulate what might be
> > contained in the document.
>
> Andrew,
>
> no offense meant, but at first sight this reply of yours sounded to me
> as just an expansion, much better worded of course, of what I myself
> wrote in that piece in 2005 I had linked to initially:
>
> http://archive09.linux.com/feature/47935
>
> then I thought: maybe you mean that the second category of macros I
> mention there (those for "one specific document") doesn't really
> exist, or cannot really exist?
>
>        Thanks,
>                 Marco
> --
>
> M. Fioretti http://mfioretti.com                   http://stop.zona-m.net
>
> Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how
> software is used *around* you
>
> --
> To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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/users/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted

-- 
To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+unsubscribe@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/users/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted