Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-openoffice-users-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-openoffice-users-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id BCED710D04 for ; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 20:34:18 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 35703 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2013 20:34:17 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-openoffice-users-archive@openoffice.apache.org Received: (qmail 35666 invoked by uid 500); 10 Nov 2013 20:34:17 -0000 Mailing-List: contact users-help@openoffice.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: users@openoffice.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list users@openoffice.apache.org Received: (qmail 35658 invoked by uid 99); 10 Nov 2013 20:34:17 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 20:34:17 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy) Received: from [213.179.193.33] (HELO a.mx.nexaima.net) (213.179.193.33) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 20:34:12 +0000 Received: from a.mx.nexaima.net (localhost.localdomain [127.0.0.1]) by a.mx.nexaima.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id C57B29E319F for ; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 15:14:15 -0500 (EST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha1; c=relaxed; d=nexaima.net; h=date:from: to:subject:message-id:reply-to:references:mime-version: content-type:in-reply-to; q=dns/txt; s=selector1; bh=CbZ6dgcYfPV jGWPBlM9hYO+fT9Y=; b=vejYn8DKMauhChBfwZeCur6DlsgN/kyJW3GgYLty86V tgGtsHynG5m7chj826Afte4g4BRD8LZZn9x8zonsYEIRPFbiNGVoVAOyS8uYYiQz o4vEibiYvzAFgZkQY2qyeOxncGpmnC2z7ZGhQhg5xncfndoCNoaHqAzcBYz4yvD4 = Received: from polaris.local (net-188-217-104-73.cust.dsl.vodafone.it [188.217.104.73]) by a.mx.nexaima.net (Postfix) with ESMTP id 870719E314D for ; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 15:14:15 -0500 (EST) Received: by polaris.local (Postfix, from userid 1000) id 0728F40A2E; Sun, 10 Nov 2013 21:31:22 +0100 (CET) Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2013 21:31:22 +0100 From: "M. Fioretti" To: users@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of... Message-ID: <20131110203122.GA14270@nexaima.net> Reply-To: "M. Fioretti" References: <20131109175647.GG2160@nexaima.net> <527EE551.6070002@gmx.org> <20131110053843.GE13132@nexaima.net> <527FC454.9050409@apache.org> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Disposition: inline In-Reply-To: <527FC454.9050409@apache.org> User-Agent: Mutt/1.5.21 (2010-09-15) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 18:43:10 PM +0100, Andrea Pescetti wrote: > On 10/11/2013 M. Fioretti wrote: > >>>http://stop.zona-m.net/2013/11/shall-we-waste-twelve-more-years-promoting-free-office-suites-instead-of-open-office-formats/ > > It's a complex issue. OpenOffice does advocate and promote ODF, > project members have prominent roles in the ODF standard maintenance > and the product shows a warning when users save in a non-ODF format. > Still, in our user survey (for existing OpenOffice users) for > version 4.x the top priority of our users was a better compatibility > with the native formats of Microsoft Office. So, as things stand > now, we'll have to do both. In fact, I did NOT say that OO the *software* should not support .docx I said that OO users and advocates should demand much, much more than they have been doing, that files are exchanged in open formats. There is a big difference. And the fact that it has been ignored is why things stand now as they stand, and all the effort put into compatibility with .docx still doesn't spare people from being told "to work with certain customers, use MS Office" Marco --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscribe@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-help@openoffice.apache.org