The deadline for feed-back to the UK was expired till Friday 5pm GMT (6pm mid-European time) due to the outage of yesterday.
Cheers, Svante PS: Regarding spelling mistakes, I copy/pasted my comment earlier in LibreOffice and used its spell checking ;) Am 27.02.2014 15:28, schrieb Tom Davies: > Hi :) > This is weird! I still seem to be able to make posts! I've gone > through a few of the early FUD ones but only got as far as page 2. I > wish i could edit the ones i posted yday because i can see all sorts > of bad spelling mistakes and problems with grammar. I think the > meaning is fairly clear but i wish i had stopped ostriching earlier > and got someone to proof-read my posts > Regards from > Tom :) > > > On 27 February 2014 10:21, Svante Schubert <svante.schub...@gmail.com> wrote: >> Am 26.02.2014 22:48, schrieb Charles-H. Schulz: >>> ... may be found here: >>> >>> http://standards.data.gov.uk/comment/974#comment-974 >>> >>> Best, >>> >> Very good post! >> >> Although I bet the CC on the us...@global.libreoffice.org took the >> server down last night. ;) >> Unfortunately I waited with my post till the very end to become the last >> post it unfortunately got lost. >> >> Please allow me to sent my post here instead so the effort was not for >> nothing and it still might help someone of your marketing: >> >> >> *Rule Britannia!* >> >> I would like to thank the Open Standards board for its courage to change >> the road being taken for decades and aiming for innovation, giving >> smaller companies an opportunity. >> I really do hope that there will be no OOXML aside of ODF in the >> proposal as there is no need for it and I fear it would weaken the >> ecosystem of transparency. >> But I have to wish you luck, as there is this saying, that it always seems >> easier for a company to add >> another software from Microsoft to its stack than a better alternative (the >> vicious circle) and an >> IT manager usually does not risk his job by choosing Microsoft. Not to >> mention the powerful MS lobby. >> Still I hope Britain is able to break free as the city of Munich did before. >> Many good lessons can be learned from Munich, which has proven that even >> with additional education the use of open-source is cheaper. Now even their >> approaches and tools can be reused/shared. >> >> Regarding innovation I would like to point out an upcoming technical >> innovation of ODF starting with change-tracking >> <https://www.oasis-open.org/committees/tc_home.php?wg_abbrev=office-collab>. >> Instead of saving >> before/after states, changes/operation are being specified and can be >> used as well for real-time collaboration. >> Two implementations (WebODF <http://webodf.org/> and OX documents >> <https://www.ox.io/ox_text>) both open-source >> <http://git.open-xchange.com/git/office> browser >> based ODF editors have taken first steps of testing a joined >> collaboration. Unthinkable that Office365 would do allow collaboration >> with applications from vendors other than Microsoft. >> >> Finally I would like to comment on the promise of Microsoft to the EU >> <http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/news/press/2009/dec09/12-16statement.aspx> to >> support every ODF ISO standard 9 months after its publishing. >> Although the Microsoft support of ODF 1.1 in MS Office 2010 was only >> moderate, the support of ODF 1.2 in MS Office 2013 is indeed quite good. >> Unfortunately they supporting only a single version of ODF in a major >> office version, while with extensions OOXML is even working back to Office >> XP. >> An interoperability nightmare. >> Even worse, when opening a valid ODF 1.2 file in MS Office 2010, it >> irritates the user by declaring the document of being corrupt (FUD >> <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fear,_uncertainty_and_doubt>?). >> The reason is that a new version attribute had been added to the ODF spec. >> Too expensive to be fixed, they say. Sad that we can not sent them (or a >> public source repository) any patches, like we can do for all the ODF >> open source. As Microsoft Office is closed source and has a >> stronghold on the market. They are able to block the progress. >> >> The problem of interoperability between versions might be fixed in >> general by providing free available transitions between the standard >> versions (better being part of the standard). It was once ignorant to state >> that a >> format will never change, this is equal to stopping evolution. Instead a >> transition must be provided to not break the chain of opening ancient >> documents. >> Aside of the above unfortunately still most/all standards lack of free >> available test suits with a good coverage. >> Even for ODF it is not able to determine what features are being >> supported by an ODF application and if it covers the feature set of the >> documents of the user. >> >> But anyway, by adopting ODF the UK can finally start moving away from >> Microsoft's >> strangling embrace. It is time for an Office Spring! >> >> *Rule, Britannia!* >> >> >> -- >> To unsubscribe e-mail to: marketing+unsubscr...@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/marketing/ >> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be >> deleted >> -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: marketing+unsubscr...@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/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
