Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: Chad Smith wrote: I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You can actually see what it's called. The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you *do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without prompt to the user) and you want to see the actual filename, then you can't see what the filename is. -Chad Smith You're right, you can't see the file name. Oh wait, except for the URL bar, or by going in a removing the title in the properties menu. All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-) OOo is an editor and here it is obvious that the file name is more important than the title of a document. This and the fact that many Word documents have automatic titles the user is not aware of are good arguments for not showing the title by default. There might be certain use cases where showing the title can be the better choice. Automatically generated files, untitled documents (that better should be called unnamed, right?) or forms come into my mind. So perhaps we can find a way to allow for both. You can watch the issue to see what happens. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Microsoft Opens Office File Formats
http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2005-06-02-a.html a longer article from OASIS. JC Helary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Note for cell
Hi, I am thinking is it possible to strengthen the note insertion function for a single cell to multiple cells. Any one of these multiple cells been pointed at, a note sign appears with lines connected to all multiple cells on the area of the screen. Regards, SN Chan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] 2.0 Beta version Calc minor problem
To anyone who is involved in programming, I was editing a spreadsheet in Calc and went to 'Save As' to rename the file I was working on. Everything was in English like it was supposed to be for the English version I am using except two check boxes under the new filename box. The descriptions of the two check boxes were in German. Not knowing German, I didn't have any idea what they were for. Just thought someone might want to know if they haven't found it out already. As for a general comment, THIS OFFICE SUITE ROCKS! To all the programmers involved, you people are terrific! Thanks for a great software package! Mike L. Lake Mary, FL
Re: [discuss] XML patent hahaha :)
On Fri, 03 Jun 2005 17:51, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: From XML.org daily newslink: Possible Prior Art for Microsoft XML Patent Found Ingrid Marson, ZDNet News UK The row over Microsoft's XML patent has taken another twist with the discovery of an open source application on Sourceforge for converting C++ programming objects into XML files that pre-dates the patent. An open source application could potentially invalidate a patent that Microsoft was granted for XML serialisation last week. A ZDNet UK reader pointed out on Thursday that SXP, a library for converting C++ programming objects into XML files, was made available on Sourceforge in February 2000. Microsoft filed its patent for the conversion of programming objects into XML files in June 2001, over a year later. Microsoft was granted the patent for XML serialisation by the US patent office. A number of software developers and ZDNet UK readers have expressed anger that Microsoft was been granted this patent, claiming that it is obvious and in general use. But Microsoft defended itself, claiming that its innovations are among the most significant across any industry. Oh god, that is hilarious! Copying and barefacedly lying about it are the most significant innovations across any industry? I can see where South Park got a lot of its inspiration from! http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/applications/ 0,39020384,39201784,00.htm See also the XML patent: http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2004-01-27-a.html#MS6898604 JC Helary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Clinersterton beademung, with all of love - RIP James Blish - Mau e ki, he aha te mea nui? You ask, what is the most important thing? Maku e ki, he tangata, he tangata, he tangata. I reply, it is people, it is people, it is people. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Electronically submitted reports (was: Microsoft Opens Office File Formats)
On Fri, 3 Jun 2005, Peter Reaper wrote: [...] Now the EU could, as a *client*, require that all electronically submitted reports be in an open format... [...] That is an excellent idea. Where would one start on that? I can think of similar reasons to do the same in the US for NSF and NIH. -Lars Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Software patents harm all Net-based business, write your MEP: http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps2.repartition?ilg=EN - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: Microsoft Opens Office File Formats
Peter Reaper wrote: Daniel Carrera on 02.06.2005 20:56 wrote: I can't say that I'm surprised. I'm hoping that the EU will force them to support the OASIS OpenDocument format. It could happen. Dream on. [...] Now the EU could, as a *client*, require that all electronically submitted reports be in an open format... Well, the pressure in EU for open standards in increasing strongly (for example we had in my country the start for such a process last week) and this look like the real reason of Microsoft Office Open (without any .org) XML Formats -- nicu my OpenOffice.org pages: http://ooo.nicubunu.ro - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Another MS XML patent
Your intent is good, but since it takes a few million dollars to overturn a dud patent yet only a few thousand to apply for one, it's possible that just shooting down bad patents may not be a viable long term strategy. ;) However, shooting down this one specifically, might be a way to garner more press for OOo if it's done right. -Lars Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Software patents harm all Net-based business, write your MEP: http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps2.repartition?ilg=EN On Thu, 2 Jun 2005, Alex wrote: I know most of you will think this idea is lame and far fetched and I'm just a wishful thinker. Would it be possible that we, as a group with all our collective backgrounds in software development, could actually gather enough irrefutable evidence so that it might be presented to a judge to prove this patent is bogus and should not have been issued? Alright! I'll just bend over and you guys can kick. Go ahead ... ;-) Alex Janssen Lars D. Noodén wrote: One problem is the junk patent which is far too vague and covers obvious developments and covers prior art. Two perl modules come to mind right off Storeable and Data::Dumper;, I'm sure there are other serialization modules in C libraries or even Pascal if one wants examples going back to the 80's or late 70's. The other is the general problem of sw patents. Which cost millions to over turn. There was a conference on the topic in Brussels last year in November and the lawyers there indicated that based on actual costs, it runs about $4 million to throw out a bad patent. So what it alsmost comes down to is a contest of which team has more money. SW Patents are a threat to *all* small and medium businesses. SMB is anything with 1 billion per year -- so that means pretty much all European business. And most of those don't have a spare $4 million every quarter to throw out the bad patents. A third problem is that MS is putting on a huge marketing / mindshare campaign right now and is doing everything possible to distract or confuse the public in regards to OpenOffice and OpenDocument. -Lars Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) Software patents harm all Net-based business, write your MEP: http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps2.repartition?ilg=EN On Wed, 1 Jun 2005, Alex wrote: Now having re-read the proper patent. I still don't see how they could be awarded a patent on what appears to be nothing more that converting a data structure defined in one file to a serial stream in another file. Sounds like storing a record in a database to me. :-\ I think Borland was doing this back in the early 90s in BP7, storing object instances on a data stream. I'll have to check on that. But it seems so overly simple. Like someone getting a patent on how you dump cerial into a bowl in the morning changing its format and then back into the box when you change your mind. You've done it thousands of times and now someone comes along and gets a patent on it. Wouldn't this procedure be considered in the public domain? Alex Janssen Sander Vesik wrote: So please englighten us, what about the patent is all that old? you seemto be seeing just soe fragments and not teh whole - recognising well-known tree species but not that you have wondered up to a forest you havne't seen before ;-) Its not that teh patent is something incredibly novel or innovative or that parts of it (or possibly all) probably won't be upheld in court or that there definitely won't be prior art - its just that it is not (as far as software patents go in this regard) somehow entirely bogus or preposterous or would cover all (or even a fraction of) computer-computer communication as people have been claiming. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Microsoft Opens Office File Formats
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: http://xml.coverpages.org/ni2005-06-02-a.html a longer article from OASIS. JC Helary - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] This is more up-to-date than what I had read on the OASIS site. -- Robin Laing - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Mathias Bauer wrote: Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: Chad Smith wrote: I don't know if I'd call it contentious. I'd call it logical. You can actually see what it's called. The OP explains *why* the 1.x way of doing things *sucks*. If you *do* have a title (which some programs automagically assign without prompt to the user) and you want to see the actual filename, then you can't see what the filename is. -Chad Smith You're right, you can't see the file name. Oh wait, except for the URL bar, or by going in a removing the title in the properties menu. All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-) The only case where I really prefer the title is when I am editing a spreadsheet or a text document (that will probably become a PDF) that I will put on the web, because the file name is full of underscores. I just don't like the way it looks. I also don't like seeing the file extension in the title bar, I think it is ugly. This of course is my preference, and not how OOo should necessarily be. I just don't understand two things: 1) What is so bad about having an option? 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? Have a good one. -- Peter Kupfer -- Using OOo since 'OO4 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to help? http://www.oooauthors.org For OOo tips: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/tips/ooo_tips_tricks.html To order OOo: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/distro/ooo_distro.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Microsoft Opens Office File Formats
cono wrote: Robin Laing wrote: If you want a good idea of how Microsoft views Open formats, look at their response to the idea of including OASIS filters in Word. The details are on the OASIS web site. http://www.oasis-open.org/home/index.php Hi Robin, Could you pls be more specific in where to find it? I'm not 'at home' at OASIS site, and see there's a lot to search. So if you know, would be friendly. Thanks, Cor Basically they don't want to support OASIS but have people use their version of XML. They may still be forced into supporting OASIS as it becomes more standardized. :) I may have been mistaken that the article came from OASIS site but it did come from a link on the site some time ago. This is one document (pdf) that I came across. It is from 2003. There are many links at the end of the document that cover many discussions on this matter. http://europa.eu.int/idabc/servlets/Doc?id=17982 And there is this on Groklaw. http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20050130002908154 Which has this pdf which is Microsoft's response to the EU public sector recommendations on open document formats. http://europa.eu.int/idabc/servlets/Doc?id=18036 In this document, the author states that some elements of the document won't be in XML format and I would assume they would still be closed source. Microsoft is afraid, rightly so, that if OASIS does become the ISO standard, then MS would lose the one hold that they have to sell their software to many organizations. They would lose a major source of income. -- Robin Laing - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] 2.0 Beta version Calc minor problem
Michael Langenes wrote: To anyone who is involved in programming, I was editing a spreadsheet in Calc and went to 'Save As' to rename the file I was working on. Everything was in English like it was supposed to be for the English version I am using except two check boxes under the new filename box. The descriptions of the two check boxes were in German. Not knowing German, I didn't have any idea what they were for. Just thought someone might want to know if they haven't found it out already. As for a general comment, THIS OFFICE SUITE ROCKS! To all the programmers involved, you people are terrific! Thanks for a great software package! Mike L. Lake Mary, FL Which version where you using? -- Peter Kupfer -- Using OOo since 'OO4 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to help? http://www.oooauthors.org For OOo tips: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/tips/ooo_tips_tricks.html To order OOo: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/distro/ooo_distro.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: Mathias Bauer wrote: ... All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-) The only case where I really prefer the title is when I am editing a spreadsheet or a text document (that will probably become a PDF) that I will put on the web, because the file name is full of underscores. I just don't like the way it looks. I also don't like seeing the file extension in the title bar, I think it is ugly. oh. i just hate when extension is not shown ;) btw, oo.org does not show extension when opening a .doc file. is this intentional ? also, i managed today with m104 achieve a situation by closing/opening doc/odt files all the time that also odt extension was not shown, so i had two windows with same title (except 2 added). that surely seems to be bug, but i can't reproduce it now :) This of course is my preference, and not how OOo should necessarily be. I just don't understand two things: 1) What is so bad about having an option? there probably are people who don't like choices and they don't want anybody else to have them ;) 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? if properly used it could be useful part of document management systems. Have a good one. -- Rich - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Rich wrote: Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: Mathias Bauer wrote: ... All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document also in OOo2.0 is making title and file name the same. ;-) The only case where I really prefer the title is when I am editing a spreadsheet or a text document (that will probably become a PDF) that I will put on the web, because the file name is full of underscores. I just don't like the way it looks. I also don't like seeing the file extension in the title bar, I think it is ugly. oh. i just hate when extension is not shown ;) btw, oo.org does not show extension when opening a .doc file. is this intentional ? I believe that when you first open a document, the title shows until you save it for the first time. For some reason this is jumping out at me as something I remember from when this issue first came up. also, i managed today with m104 achieve a situation by closing/opening doc/odt files all the time that also odt extension was not shown, so i had two windows with same title (except 2 added). 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? if properly used it could be useful part of document management systems. How, if you never see it? -- Peter Kupfer -- Using OOo since 'OO4 -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Want to help? http://www.oooauthors.org For OOo tips: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/tips/ooo_tips_tricks.html To order OOo: http://openoffice.peschtra.com/distro/ooo_distro.html - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: Rich wrote: ... if properly used it could be useful part of document management systems. How, if you never see it? if properly used, you do :) it would be indexed and you could sort/search for it (as one of many fields) -- Rich - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Peter Kupfer OOo wrote: 1) What is so bad about having an option? Of course basically nothing except possible bloat. :-) We didn't close the issue, so it can be worked on. My current favorite is to switch on displaying the title not as a global option, but as a document specific one. If you enter a title in the document properties dialog you can also mark it to become displayed. What about this? 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? You can use it in different places. And IMHO the title indeed is superfluous on most operating systems because you can use long file names. The title property goes back to ancient times where filenames had to be 8+3, it's a legacy. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Rich wrote: oh. i just hate when extension is not shown ;) btw, oo.org does not show extension when opening a .doc file. is this intentional ? also, i managed today with m104 achieve a situation by closing/opening doc/odt files all the time that also odt extension was not shown, so i had two windows with same title (except 2 added). that surely seems to be bug, but i can't reproduce it now :) Both are bugs. Extensions should be shown always, a possible alternative is showing them only if the operation systems doesn't have an option not to do so that is set. Windows per default doesn't show extensions (in Explorer etc.), so it's an option to respect this setting. 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? if properly used it could be useful part of document management systems. That's a good point, maybe this is more convenient than the file name, I'm not sure. In general having title and file name looks redundant to me. OK, file names don't allow every character (at least on Windows, on Linux or Unix only a slash is illegal IIRC), but that's bearable IMHO. I don't argue against having a title property, I'm only pointing out that for end users a file name is enough. Best regards, Mathias -- Mathias Bauer - OpenOffice.org Application Framework Project Lead Please reply to the list only, [EMAIL PROTECTED] is a spam sink. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
Mathias Bauer wrote: All platforms that OOo runs on (or at least the ones I know) support long file names, so the easiest way to see the title for all document making title and file name the same. ;-) However, if you are moving a file between comouters (by email, web, CD etc.), non-latin filenames can be very problematic. In those cases, it is really handy to have a latin filename, and a non-latin (Hebrew, Arabic, Thai etc.) title. Since 2.0 longer displayes the title, I honestly do miss that flexibility. -- Shoshannah Forbes http://www.xslf.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
On Fri, Jun 03, 2005 18:26:38 PM +0200, Mathias Bauer ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: 2) What is the point of the title property if it isn't displayed? You can use it in different places. And IMHO the title indeed is superfluous on most operating systems because you can use long file names. The title property goes back to ancient times where filenames had to be 8+3, it's a legacy. I have read this message by mistake. I deleted all previous messages of this thread without reading because I have no opinion or strong wish in one way or another about where titles should be displayed. So, maybe this has already said, but the statement that titles todays are superfluous because you can just embed them in long filenames and display those is wrong. In large companies there are huge quantities of internal docs whose file name have been longer than 8.3 for years but, by company policy, must be the human-unreadable part number of the product they refer to. Sometimes preceeded by the equally unreadable acronym of the long-gone department who developed them. Changing the CMS system where all this stuff is archived and searched according to those filenames would cost a lot, so nobody does it. So it may be as ugly as hell, but is not going to go away soon. So, unless you were the one who *personally* wrote file 145751-102_719-FCFP-504_Uen.doc in 1989, it's handy to have and see somewhere the string Test Specification for energy efficient washer Ciao, Marco F. -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ The biggest problem with communication is the illusion that it has occurred read on Slashdot - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Please put actual filename in header bar
On Sat, Jun 04, 2005 07:48:22 AM +0200, io ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Changing the CMS system where all this stuff is archived and searched according to those filenames would cost a lot, so nobody does it. So it may be as ugly as hell, but is not going to go away soon. So, unless you were the one who *personally* wrote file 145751-102_719-FCFP-504_Uen.doc in 1989, it's handy to have and see somewhere the string Test Specification for energy efficient washer I forgot to add that the all this is even more true when the Test specification... string contains non-ASCII characters Ciao, Marco -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ With the right to be informed goes the duty to seek information. Information does not simply occur; it has to be sought. PASTORAL INSTRUCTION COMMUNIO ET PROGRESSIO - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
