Hello Pedro,
Le Sun, 26 Jun 2011 14:21:25 -0700 (PDT), plino <pedl...@gmail.com> a écrit : > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > > > But let me ask it > > again: why should it not be the right file format for LibreOffice? > > Fonts embedding cannot be the only one feature that will help us > > break the dominant vendor's monopoly, can it? > > > > Because any document that allows the use of different fonts and > relies on them to be displayed as expected needs to have the ability > to embed fonts. No, ODF already has the most important feature: > vendor independence. But if the dominant vendor includes a feature > and it is critical for some type of documents, not including it is a > handicap. And it can become a serious barrier for wide adoption. I don't necessarily agree on that -MS OOXML includes features you don't find inside ODF but few people even know they are there- but while this feature is important to you I strongly feel that it's something very, very few MS Office users know about... > > Regarding your demonstration Cases: Case A is a non-issue. If users > decide to ignore instructions and use it incorrectly is it the OASIS > or TDFs fault? Should microwave manufacturers not sell microwaves > because someone in the future might have the brilliant idea of drying > their cat in it? Oh, there are lawsuits like that every month. Remember there are record labels suing BitTorrent just because it can be used to download music? > > Case B: if in a given device fonts are not displayed properly (the > software should warn about that) But in the case of TextEdit, it doesn't, and good luck to have Apple fix that. > then ODF is still doing it's most > important job i.e. making sure the contents are displayed in a > readable way. That is right. > > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > If you want absolute layout fidelity use PDF. That's the reason it's > > been designed, not ODF. > > PDF is used for keeping printing fidelity. layout fidelity. Which means printing fidelity and visual fidelity, not only for printing. > It's not an editable > format. Should I make my presentations using a PDF? What you can do is export your presentations under PDF. Many people do that. > Following that reasoning I should use PPT for my presentations > "That's the reason it's been designed, not ODF" Here's the glitch: You would have to set that specific option for PPT. If you send it to me maybe I won't be able to read them. > > > Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > > Do you have any idea what it takes to spread the use of a format? > > No, I don't. But can you accept that it probably takes longer to > accept a format that has limitations than if the format is superior > to the one it's replacing? Except that these "limitations" do not seem to be crucial for many people.But to come back to spreading the use of a format: its features are not what will make the format's use spread (in the office documents context), it's the choice of applications + the adoption policy + raising the awareness + ecosystem development + change management inside organizations using it . > How long will it take mkv to replace avi? Not much I guess ;) Bad example, I think. .avi is not dependent on a dominant player imposing the use of its own formats. How long will it take to .ogg to replace .mp3 or .m4a? Best, Charles. > > Regards, > Pedro > > -- > View this message in context: > http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/RE-tdf-discuss-Re-Font-Embedding-in-ODF-was-RE-ANN-ODF-1-2-Candidate-OASIS-Standard-Enters-60-Day-Pu-tp3110117p3111827.html > Sent from the Discuss mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > -- Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+h...@documentfoundation.org Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
