openoffice-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Dennis E. Hamilton" <dennis.hamil...@acm.org>
Subject RE: OOXML
Date Sat, 02 Aug 2014 18:27:04 GMT
<orcnote>s below.


-----Original Message-----
From: jan i [mailto:jani@apache.org] 
Sent: Saturday, August 2, 2014 08:57
To: dev
Subject: Re: OOXML

On 2 August 2014 17:06, Louis Suárez-Potts <luispo@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> > On 2014-08-02, at 10:24, Alexandro Colorado <jza@oooes.org> wrote:
> >
> > The Support that is done is to receieve OOXML not to produce them, the
> > discussion issue would be to support legacy formats like .doc or .xls.
> >
> > I still dont see a point to generate OOXML and most people dont care
> > as long as they can send in office native formats.
> >
> > I never heard someone saying, please send it on docx, your doc is a
> > closed binary format.
>
> Actually, I have. But it also matters on mobile, as well as, I'd guess,
> for some developing processes for batch conversion of documents. Finally,
> it's not evident to me that refusing to develop to what is likely to become
> the major desktop document format globally—alas—is a good strategy that
> would lead to the adoption of OO. Rather, it seems it would only help those
> applications that do (express) both ODF *and* .docx well.
>

Please dont forget, the computer business have always had 2 types of
standard the official one and the de facto one.

For those to young to remember, tcp/ip is not an official standard (OSI
was) but something a number of companies decided to promote, I see docx in
the same light.

<orcnote>
   I think this has it backwards.  For ages, .doc was the defacto standard 
   And de jure ISO/W3C standards like SGML, ODA, and even XML did not do 
   Anything to dent that.  That is now .doc and .docx, however defacto 
   you consider them to be (although they are both now all open formats).

   I am squarely in the same camp as Peter Kelley and Luis Suarez-
   Potts with regard to the pragmatic situation that exists.  One-way 
   movement to ODF is simply going to be unacceptable, possibly forever,
   if you are determined to have "there must be only one" in a niche of
   like-minded followers.

   This is unfortunate for one particular reason -- ODF is the only well-
   established multi-platform document format, thanks to the wider platform
   support of LibreOffice and Apache OpenOffice.  (Those also introduce
   de facto and monoculture factors that are omitted in the marketing 
   speak.)

   But without a dramatic increase in Linux penetration, this may not dent
   The state of affairs much.  The bigger penetration opportunity is iOS 
   and Android, not Linux.  And you may have noticed that Microsoft has 
   figured that out and is moving dramatically to provide OOXML inter-
   operability via the cloud (especially Sky-/One-Drive and Office Web 
   Apps) and via phone/phablet/tablet presence on Windows 8, WindowsPhone8, 
   Android (including the Amazon flavor), and iOS.  There are even 
   provisions for concurrent collaboration already strong in the flag-
   carrying application, Microsoft OneNote, an openly-documented but 
   not-standardized format.  

   The last time I checked, the OneDrive free in-browser Office Web Apps 
   also support ODF 1.2 documents, although it will convert them to a 
   MSO-compatible cloud subset form if you want to edit them there, even
   Though retrievable in ODF 1.2.  Viewing works out of the box.  My 
   impression of the editing pre-conversion is that is a safety measure 
   in case any ODF feature loss is unacceptable and so you still have an 
   intact original there.
</orcmid>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: dev-help@openoffice.apache.org


Mime
View raw message