Re: [us-marketing] European IT authorities want better OOXML in Libre/OpenOffice

On 12/16/2011 03:13 AM, Georges Rodier wrote:
> Le jeudi 15 décembre 2011 à 10:37 -0500, webmaster for Kracked Press
> Productions a écrit :
> > One issue I have is that they claim MSO's format is the International
> > Standard.  [clip]
> Perhaps there would have been less confusion had that second paragraph
> in the H Open article had started, "Of the two ISO document
> standards..." The full phrase would then have read, "Of the two ISO
> document standards, OOXML is the ISO standard for office documents that
> is predominantly supported by Microsoft;..." When read fully, I do not
> see the full sentence as stating that OOXML is THE standard, but rather
> it's being the one "predominantly supported by Microsoft". Personally, I
> would have written "only supported by Microsoft", but that's only an
> opinion.
>
> Then too, in addition to reading the H Open article, I did find the pdf
> of Dr. Matthias Stürmer's presentation to to Paris 2011 quite
> informative (and no mention of OOXML as THE standard).
>
> Again, personally, I would like to see quality opening and displaying of
> OOXML by LibO but I'm not really on board for saving documents in that
> format. Still, I do understand the reasons for the project and wish them
> well.
>
> Georges
The exact wording of the article may not say OOXML is THE standard, but 
it seems to imply it to the readers.

YES the article would have been better with the "of the two ISO 
standards", but it did not say it.  Also, the way it was written, it 
implies that ODF is not the office document standard, but a set of 
formats you can use instead of the OOXML standard.

The way it was written makes me feel that OOXML is the only ISO.   That 
is the big issue for me.  ODF was the standard voted on first, over 
OOXML, but then OOXML got voted on to be a second standard.  It use to 
be that if the ISO committee voted on a standard, then that is the ONE 
standard.  There could not be two competing standards, since it seems 
that the purpose of the ISO standard was to tell you which was the one 
world wide standard to use, not choose between two different ones and 
hope everyone can use both of them.

But, as it was said in other posts/threads, any article that has a 
positive notation for LibreOffice is a positive thing for LO and maybe 
the open-source community.

It would be great to have others working on reverse engineering MSO's 
file formats.  Anything to make the use of the OOXML formats better is a 
positive thing.  The issue of editing these formats with LO and then 
having MSO use/view them the way LO edited them to be, is a big issue 
for full compatibility between LO/OOo and MSO.  What that happens, then 
it will be a big step for people who want to use LO in the MSO dominated 
market.  But, be then, MSO will, most likely, create a new document 
format that they use as the default and the open-source community must 
start the compatibility process all over again.  MSO does not want 
others to compete, and they want the individual/business to be required 
to buy their products to use their dominate file formats.  They may do 
anything to keep the open-source from being a fully compatible competition.

.


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to marketing+help@us.libreoffice.org
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/us/marketing/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted