Re: [discuss] Re: OO.o Macros with Python interpreter?
Ian wrote: At the risk of getting flamed I think that Marco has a good idea, I would like to bounce some ideas about how it could be implemented. Oh, until now I don't see that anybody denied that. It just seems that Marco doesn't know how things work and why it is so complicated to implement this idea. There is nothing bad with it, finally Marco isn't a developer, but I think we should try to understand what we are talking about. For me it is necessary that any possible standard for macros is language agnostic so that it gives you the choice of the macro language. Of course the possibles languages should already follow accepted standards also or need an also standardized runtime. The main standardization work needs to be done on the API. I can see two, not mutually exclusive, possibilities: 1. With XML forms and probably JavaScript (as I think this is currently the recognised standard for the web, although I too would prefer Python) it should be possible to implement Marco's interactive learning scenario. Yes and no. It depends on the desired function set. After more discussion if this, or some other idea is seen as workable, then suggest an update to the open document standard. No, IMHO this goes beyond the OpenDocument standard. I also like the idea of standardizing a basic set of functions for scripting, but that should be done in another process, not in the OASIS Open Document TC. Adhering to standards always is a voluntary decision. If developers stick to the Open Document standard they do it because they think standardization is a good thing. So I assume their willingness to support a possible scripting standard is not influenced by the fact wether this standard is part of Open Document or another standard solely for document scripting. 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]
[discuss] Re: OO.o Macros with Python interpreter?
Ian Laurenson wrote: At the risk of getting flamed I think that Marco has a good idea, Hi Ian, Yes, the idea of standarisatin is a really good one. Internet is the proof: it wouldn't have been possible without common standard protocols. I can imagine a world where all applications share a common set of standard objects. For instance, text paragraphs, tables, page formats etc. I remember Oberon, some years ago, an OS from N. Wirth that was based in this model. But we are very far from that. Even for the very basic GUI toolkits we have several different models (MFC, Qt, GTK ...), although a common denominator is appearing. But still, a Table is a different beast for OOo, KOffice, AbiWord or MS-Office, page numbers are a property of page styles for ones, and first hand, independent, objects for others etc. Is it possible to define a common API to manage OpenDocument programmatically?(not including GUI aspects), yes, of course. And with some more rounds of standarization and agreement between software makers it will be a reality. Not in the short term, but an idea that deserves consideration and long-term determination to make it happen. - Enrique - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Why can't v2.0 save in WordPerfect format???
On Sunday 05 June 2005 04:39, Sweet Coffee wrote: Hello! Why isn't there an option to save files in WordPerfect formats? I know v2.0 can open WordPerfect files but I do not see an option to save in WordPerfect format. I guess because there is more work to be done on that format converstion. If you are interesrted in this feature, then I'm sure that the developers would appreciate your help. -- CPH : openoffice.org contributor Maybe your question has been answered already? http://user-faq.openoffice.org/#FAQ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: OO.o Macros with Python interpreter?
Enrique wrote: Is it possible to define a common API to manage OpenDocument programmatically?(not including GUI aspects), yes, of course. And with some more rounds of standarization and agreement between software makers it will be a reality. Not in the short term, but an idea that deserves consideration and long-term determination to make it happen. This API already exists, it's DOM, but in OOo at least now (for technical reasons) it is not applicable in live mode. That means, you can apply changes through DOM while you load the document without any problems, but if you do it after loading you need to re-import the document (or at least parts of it) from its XML representation or keep the whole DOM in memory all the time and update your document core automatically. Both is currently not implemented in OOo, but IMHO it is basically possible to implement it. The DOM API itself is standardized, but this alone is not enough to get portable macros, you also need a common XML format - but that's given in our case - thanks to OpenDocument. Admittedly DOM is way too complicated for the average user (not for a large number of HTML hackers of course), but this can be overcome by standardizing on high level macro functions that can be implemented with DOM. The nice thing is that this implementation has to be carried out only once in each scripting language and each application that implements DOM can use it (provided that it has a suitable component technology and language binding for the scripting language and the component technology). This way we decouple the different efforts: A group of people can think about a standardized, more procedural or conventional object oriented approach for macros and provide implementations for it based on DOM calls for different scripting languages. If all applications used the same component technology we would need only one implementation of this API that can be used in all scripting languages, but that is very unlikely to happen. Each application that wants to support the standardized macros must provide a suitable component technology (like UNO) and a DOM API implementation based on it that can be called from any scripting language that is able to utilize this component technology through a language binding. This is already possible with OOo. Additionally to support live editing of documents a DOM update mechanism must be implemented for the application and OOo currently doesn't have this. It's a huge undertaking, but IMHO it has a higher probability to get implemented than anything else I can think of with the goal of macro standardization. And it has the additional benefit that it automatically falls back to OpenDocument! Please get me right: I don't ask for doing this now or in the near future, but *if* macro standardization ever became a high priority that's the way I would like to do it. 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] Re: OO.o Macros with Python interpreter?
Mathias Bauer wrote: Enrique wrote: Is it possible to define a common API to manage OpenDocument programmatically?(not including GUI aspects), yes, of course. And with some more rounds of standarization and agreement between software makers it will be a reality. Not in the short term, but an idea that deserves consideration and long-term determination to make it happen. This API already exists, it's DOM. I forgot to mention an important fact: DOM can operate on the document even without loading it into the application, you don't need the document core implementation for it. So basically you can write macros that run inside the application or outside, e.g. on a server. It needs a lot of organizing and customization to make the OOo DOM implementation work in this mode, but it's possible IMHO (somebody in the know might correct me if I'm wrong). 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] Re: OO.o Macros with Python interpreter?
Quoting Bernd Eilers [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi there! [...] please let me know what you think of my reply to Daniel, where I talk of a set of python functions etc What I think is that you think about things that in reality are very hughe and complex as being small and simple things. When you say A set of python functions that just sounds like you are thinking an API for an Office Programm like OOo would only need well lets say only a handful of functions to be exposed to someone wanting to write macros or extensions in Python or whatever language. The reality is much different: OOo exposes lots of special tiny details to the programmer enabeling a wide range of possibilities to modify documents and the user interface or to automate tasks. The OOo API can be called from different languages Basic, java, pyhton, C++, ... Please have a look at the reference manual at http://api.openoffice.org/docs/common/ref/com/sun/star/module-ix.html to see how big and complex the API really is. This is definitifly not something that can be redesigned and rewritten from scratch easily in a few man-weeks work (eg. its not doable in some summer code camp or something similar like you suggested). One would have to do it all again from scratch if a new API should be created which should be usable by more than one open source applications. Despite that the implementation of the API is interlocked with the implementation of the programs features, which means you would have to rewrite most if not all of that too. The Koffice API might eventually be not that complex but you can be sure its totally different. And thus it would not be easy to align those two. If those two office packages had almost zero history and - well lets say development would just have been started a few weeks ago on them or similar - things may be different, but after all why start two fresh projects than using the same API, you would be better of concentrating on finishing one using the API you would have designed. Having said all that I suppose if its just for the very very very simple tasks like inserting some text into a document etc. there might in theory be the possibility to create two versions of a small library, exposing the same API to the programmer using two different sets of the underlying more complex Application APIs insided. Portability would than be there but usability and options for such a lib would be very limited compared to using the applications current own APIs directly. Thanks, Marco Kind regards, Bernd I think marco's point is something similar to for example Python relationship with Mysql, there are two libraries, MySQLdb-python and mysql-python which are wrappers sometimes overlapping each other. What Marco want is a set of pre-configured instructions that will ease the development of text manipulation, element recognition, etc. This wont necesary re-design or re-implement the API it will just simplify the basic level of manipulation through wrappers. Small example would be to get rid of the com.sun.star which are repeated through out all the components/modules of the scripting ( I think some languages already do). -- Alexandro Colorado Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish http://es.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] OpenOffice - Calc
First of all :Sorry for my bad english ! I need some help with following problem : If i insert a graphic in a new table and bring it to background, i'm not able to bring it back on top. The graphic becomes a watermark and is no longer accessable. While the text is still open, i use Edit - Undo to bring it again to foreground, but if the document is safed and closed, there is no chance to edit the graphic. Or am i wrong ? Thanks for your answers. Bye Jens - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] OpenOffice - Calc
Hello Jens, Jens Kellermann wrote: First of all :Sorry for my bad english ! No prob for me. I need some help with following problem : If i insert a graphic in a new table and bring it to background, i'm not able to bring it back on top. The graphic becomes a watermark and is no longer accessable. You can access it via the navigator! kind regards, Cor -- Cor Nouws http://www.nouenoff.nl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: OpenOffice - Calc
THANK YOU! It works ! cono [EMAIL PROTECTED] schrieb im Newsbeitrag news:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Hello Jens, Jens Kellermann wrote: First of all :Sorry for my bad english ! No prob for me. I need some help with following problem : If i insert a graphic in a new table and bring it to background, i'm not able to bring it back on top. The graphic becomes a watermark and is no longer accessable. You can access it via the navigator! kind regards, Cor -- Cor Nouws http://www.nouenoff.nl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Cursor Issue
Quoting eng edu [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am a writer and I am using OpenOffice for quite sometime now. One of the features that I find very useful (and as a matter of fact unique to OpenOffice) is that every time I reopen a document, the cursor will be exactly at the place where I have left it last time. This of course saves time and it also helps to keep some sort of continuity on the work that I am doing. Unfortunately I realized that this is not the case with the 1.9.100 version of the program. Now every time I open a document the cursor is back at the top. I was wondering if there is an option that I am not aware of, in this new version to address this problem. Thank you in advance. yes this are called reminders and you can see them when you click on the arrows at the bottom of the document. Here is an example: http://www.alexandrocolorado.com/pages/gallery/albums/pcstuff/aag.png -- Alexandro Colorado Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish http://es.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Cursor Issue
Hi Alexandro, Alexandro Colorado wrote: Quoting eng edu [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am a writer and I am using OpenOffice for quite sometime now. One of the features that I find very useful (and as a matter of fact unique to OpenOffice) is that every time I reopen a document, the cursor will be exactly at the place where I have left it last time. This of course saves time and it also helps to keep some sort of continuity on the work that I am doing. Unfortunately I realized that this is not the case with the 1.9.100 version of the program. Now every time I open a document the cursor is back at the top. I was wondering if there is an option that I am not aware of, in this new version to address this problem. Thank you in advance. yes this are called reminders and you can see them when you click on the arrows at the bottom of the document. Here is an example: http://www.alexandrocolorado.com/pages/gallery/albums/pcstuff/aag.png Alas, these positions are not kept after the doc has been closed. There's a interesting discussion going on at i43146. Kind regards, Cor -- Cor Nouws http://www.nouenoff.nl - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] non-initial hanging indent
I'm using OO 1.9.104 but the question can be generalised to any version. Is it possible to start a line with some text, then tab to some position and then begin a hanging indent from that position. I've tried various things but bullets and the indents only seem to like to be at the beginning of the line and not preceded in the line by some text. Reading the help file doesn't supply an example of this type. I am told that you used to be able to do this in MSWord by typing some text and then hitting Ctl-t which takes you to the next tab and starts a hanging indent at that point. The only workaround I've found is to create a table with invisible borders but surely a more elegant solution exists. Thanks in advance, Jonathan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: non-initial hanging indent
Jonathan Kaye wrote: I'm using OO 1.9.104 but the question can be generalised to any version. Is it possible to start a line with some text, then tab to some position and then begin a hanging indent from that position. I've tried various things but bullets and the indents only seem to like to be at the beginning of the line and not preceded in the line by some text. Reading the help file doesn't supply an example of this type. I am told that you used to be able to do this in MSWord by typing some text and then hitting Ctl-t which takes you to the next tab and starts a hanging indent at that point. The only workaround I've found is to create a table with invisible borders but surely a more elegant solution exists. Thanks in advance, Jonathan You can use predefined paragraph style 'List indent' and look at this style properties to fit this to your needs. ain - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Re: non-initial hanging indent
En/La Ain Vagula ha escrit, a 08/06/05 18:03: Jonathan Kaye wrote: snip You can use predefined paragraph style 'List indent' and look at this style properties to fit this to your needs. ain Thanks Ain, It works brilliantly. Exactly what I wanted. Yet another example why OO and this list are fantastic. Cheers, Jonathan - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
Greetings, in the last two days I've been able to check this list only through webmail, that is in an almost unreadable interface. I have seen there have been a lot of posts about my obsession with doing portable OpenDocument macros in Python or whatever else. Due to the problems above I've been only able to read some parts of only a few messages. I will re-read them and answer when needed now, but what I read from webmail makes me already think it's necessary to (re)-explain why I'm making such a pest of myself, to put everything in context. I am not a C/C++ programmer and have no time or skills to become one in the foreseable future. However, I am an advanced Linux user, pretty good with shell, Perl and other kinds of scripting, and *very* interested in advancement of open standards. So, yes, I do know just enough IT to be obnoxious, but I am (I hope) aware of it most of the time, and do it in good faith. I have realized that: macros are not portable across OO.o KOffice and other future OpenDocument processors end users *will* expect them to be portable, since they are into the file whose format is standard, didn't you tell us so? this and similar things can become sensible PR problems for OO.o and FOSS in general (MS was right, this darn FOSS circus *is* so fragmented and lacking a common strategy to be unusable...) almost all developers I've asked about this had never realized the last two points above. Some *have* expressed interest and said it is a good idea which should be worked on in the future. So, I agree a macro scripting standard should not be part of OpenDocument I agree that it will never be able to replicate everything in the current OO.o API, and agree that it would be unnecessary, to say the least I am sure that if this ever becomes a standard as I hope, it should be ratified (under a truly open IP policy) from OASIS or similar organizations, otherwise it won't be taken seriously I am *not* asking you or anybody else to do it for me yesterday but I want to write an article that: explains the problem, so IT-challenged end users (and buyers) will be aware of it, and don't plague oo-users and similar lists with macros aren't portable complaints two years from now (*) define what is unnecessary/unrealistic to ask and why define what could be a limited, more realistic goal (the javascript-like, in-document only macros), and list what one should do, what to read, which lists to join etc... to give a hand (consider that EU and other public organizations around *do* fund from time to time far-fetched FOSS-related projects, so if all this makes them fund some third party to do it, everybody is happy: stranger things have happened...) So this is the context in which my questions should be read: there is a practical reason and, I hope, something useful to the whole community in helping me to sort this out. Back to the original thread now. TIA, Marco (*) Who am I kidding? They *will* come in droves to bother you, but you will be able to just tell them Shut up and just read Marco's article to know why not!. Am I helpful or what? :-) -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ A good day is for me much food, much sex, much children. Kirstie Alley - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: HBS WK: Who will win Microsoft or Linux?
On Wed, 2005-06-08 at 12:43 -0400, Chuck wrote: My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap, expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this is true, but it's what most people think. People for some strange reason *want* to pay for software when equal or superior software is available for free. OSS has been available for years to fill many needs and yet it never garners more than 1-2% of the market. Firefox, Thunderbird, OOo, Linux, and others are perfect examples. They are all superior to their commercial counterparts but are no where near replacing them in the market. Chuck- You're wrong. You'll need to read the adoption data coming from offshore activity. The US is no place to be making such broad declarations because it will be the last place MS will sell product, then poof, no more Microsoft...unless they become a Free Software services company. They could become good at that. Your trolling doesn't work. Check your data. -Sam Alex wrote: OSS has already replaced a number of commercial elements. Firefox for browsing, Thunderbird for email, OpenOffice for (guess what here) in my business, Linux for a file server ( soon the desktop). I don't get your commment. :-) Cheers, Alex Janssen Chuck wrote: Anthony Long wrote: I'm curious to know what people think about this article? http://hbsworkingknowledge.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4834t=technology Cheers, Anthony There are four things in life that are guaranteed... 1) You will be born 2) You will die 3) You will pay taxes 4) OSS will _NEVER_ replace commercial software - 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] Re: HBS WK: Who will win Microsoft or Linux?
Chuck wrote: My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap, expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this is true, but it's what most people think. People for some strange reason *want* to pay for software when equal or superior software is available for free. OSS has been available for years to fill many needs and yet it never garners more than 1-2% of the market. Firefox, Thunderbird, OOo, Linux, and others are perfect examples. They are all superior to their commercial counterparts but are no where near replacing them in the market. Robert Derman replies: No situation lasts forever, sooner or later people WILL realize that high price is _no_ guarantee of quality, at least as far as software is concerned, and cheap or free does not nessisarily mean junk. When that happens and it will happen, FLOSS software will take off and commercial software will become a niche market item. Alex wrote: OSS has already replaced a number of commercial elements. Firefox for browsing, Thunderbird for email, OpenOffice for (guess what here) in my business, Linux for a file server ( soon the desktop). I don't get your commment. :-) Cheers, Alex Janssen Chuck wrote: Anthony Long wrote: I'm curious to know what people think about this article? http://hbsworkingknowledge.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4834t=technology Cheers, Anthony There are four things in life that are guaranteed... 1) You will be born 2) You will die 3) You will pay taxes 4) OSS will _NEVER_ replace commercial software - 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] Re: HBS WK: Who will win Microsoft or Linux?
Chuck wrote: My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap, expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this is true, but it's what most people think. People for some strange reason *want* to pay for software when equal or superior software is available for free. OSS has been available for years to fill many needs and yet it never garners more than 1-2% of the market. Firefox, Thunderbird, OOo, Linux, and others are perfect examples. They are all superior to their commercial counterparts but are no where near replacing them in the market. Alex wrote: I will disagree. I think you will see a major shift in the EU to OSS or other packages as standards are enforced. From the discussion about MS XML format not being compatible with OASIS and MS not supporting OASIS may force many organizations to move to an alternative that supports OASIS. Guess what, at present the only deal is OSS. Also, as people get exposure to OOo as an example, they start using it more. Especially when they know they don't' have to pay and they don't have to worry about being found out. A group that I am involved with is going to be handing out CDs and I plan on including OOo on the CD (space permitting). This will increase exposure. MS offers Office at a low cost to schools and students to get them exposed. The problem is MS then does audits which end up costing lots of money. As students are exposed, they don't know any better. MS loves the ability to bundle. How many people have never heard of or even considered using Firefox or Mozilla. They use what is there. If OSS can save the person at home that $100 for the software, then they will use it more. I know people that have tried OOo and been very happy. No need to find a copy or purchase MS Office. -- Robin Laing - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
Top posting. I think that adding Javascript-like functionality would be a worthy goal. In fact... we should Javascript itself the first macro language and make it do everything Javascript currently does on web pages. Why? I'm glad you ask! Gary Edwards has this great idea of talking to W3C to grab OpenDocument as the evolutionary step after XHTML. It's possible. OpenDocument brings together a lot of W3C standards, and OD itself is an OASIS standard and soon will be an ISO standard. Finally, W3C is in regular contact with the OASIS technical committee that oversees OpenDocument. So... the idea of OD becomming a W3C recommendation is not far out. Making it the replacement of XHTML is harder, but not impossible. In any event, back to your note. Having Javascript work with OD files would be the way to go if OD were to work with the web of the future. Cheers, Daniel. M. Fioretti wrote: Greetings, in the last two days I've been able to check this list only through webmail, that is in an almost unreadable interface. I have seen there have been a lot of posts about my obsession with doing portable OpenDocument macros in Python or whatever else. Due to the problems above I've been only able to read some parts of only a few messages. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 19:45:26 PM +0200, Nicolas Mailhot ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Le mercredi 08 juin 2005 à 19:14 +0200, M. Fioretti a écrit : define what could be a limited, more realistic goal (the javascript-like, in-document only macros), and list what one should do, what to read, which lists to join etc... to give a hand The limited stuff is what XForms is about : a clearly delimited set of functionality, with a standard way of expressing it. Any proposal that's just let's use a langage (basic, python, javascript) without defining compliance profiles is just opening up the doors for incompatible implementations (because the core will be the same but the overlaps limited) Please help me to understand it better: I read online that XForms is a platform independent markup language for data capture and validation. Not necessarily data processing. Do you mean that one should only write these macros in Xforms markup language or that one should write them in $LANGUAGE but only accessing/reading/writing/processing XForms elements? All of this from within OO.o? TIA, Marco -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ ... Work like you don't need money, love like you've never been hurt, and dance like nobody is watching. Anonymous - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] MS Office Import/Export
Looking for answers to previous posts - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
On Wed, Jun 08, 2005 13:54:43 PM -0400, Daniel Carrera ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote: Top posting. I think that adding Javascript-like functionality would be a worthy goal. In fact... we should Javascript itself the first macro language and make it do everything Javascript currently does on web pages. [...] In any event, back to your note. Having Javascript work with OD files would be the way to go if OD were to work with the web of the future. Me, I've nothing serious against JavaScript, except, maybe, the fact that if one goes Python, Perl or similar, he may reuse some of that knowledge in other areas of computing. However, I vaguely remember to have read somewhere in these threads arguing *against* it, so I'll wait for more knowledgeable comments. Thanks for pointing JavaScript out! Marco -- Marco Fiorettimfioretti, at the server mclink.it Fedora Core 3 for low memory http://www.rule-project.org/ Never let your sense of morals prevent you from doing what is right Salvor Hardin , Foundation - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
M. Fioretti wrote: Please help me to understand it better: I read online that XForms is a platform independent markup language for data capture and validation. Not necessarily data processing. Do you mean that one should only write these macros in Xforms markup language or that one should write them in $LANGUAGE but only accessing/reading/writing/processing XForms elements? All of this from within OO.o? Yeah... I don't think xforms can do everything Javascript can. I realize that xforms are supposed to make JS unnecessary for *forms*. But there is more to macros than forms. For example, I could make a tic tac toe game with Javascript, and I doubt I could with xforms. Cheers, Daniel. - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Some explanations on my macro standard nagging
Le mercredi 08 juin 2005 14:38 -0400, Daniel Carrera a crit : M. Fioretti wrote: Please help me to understand it better: I read online that XForms is a platform independent markup language for data capture and validation. Not necessarily data processing. Do you mean that one should only write these macros in Xforms markup language or that one should write them in $LANGUAGE but only accessing/reading/writing/processing XForms elements? All of this from within OO.o? Yeah... I don't think xforms can do everything Javascript can. I realize that xforms are supposed to make JS unnecessary for *forms*. But there is more to macros than forms. For example, I could make a tic tac toe game with Javascript, and I doubt I could with xforms. However who'd need a standard way to do tic tac toe ? If everyone uses macros for the same things, that means you can do XForm-like standardisation. People who want to do tic tac toe games won't complain about standards later - it's not the same use cases at all. Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot
Re: [discuss] Re: HBS WK: Who will win Microsoft or Linux?
That's why you can build your company on the support of free software. And is NO easy task, you need to have a lil army of experts around the clock. You just dont have developers but you still have manteinance support, trainning, and other services. example, how many people actually pay for MSO, most people pirate it. However the MSO trainning still generates a lot of revenue as well as the books, call center support, technicians, consultants, integrators. etc. Quoting Chuck [EMAIL PROTECTED]: My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to commercial software. Most people believe that a program's quality is proportional to it's price. In their minds, free = piece of crap, expensive equals great software with great support. I'm not saying this is true, but it's what most people think. People for some strange reason *want* to pay for software when equal or superior software is available for free. OSS has been available for years to fill many needs and yet it never garners more than 1-2% of the market. Firefox, Thunderbird, OOo, Linux, and others are perfect examples. They are all superior to their commercial counterparts but are no where near replacing them in the market. Alex wrote: OSS has already replaced a number of commercial elements. Firefox for browsing, Thunderbird for email, OpenOffice for (guess what here) in my business, Linux for a file server ( soon the desktop). I don't get your commment. :-) Cheers, Alex Janssen Chuck wrote: Anthony Long wrote: I'm curious to know what people think about this article? http://hbsworkingknowledge.hbs.edu/item.jhtml?id=4834t=technology Cheers, Anthony There are four things in life that are guaranteed... 1) You will be born 2) You will die 3) You will pay taxes 4) OSS will _NEVER_ replace commercial software - 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] -- Alexandro Colorado Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish http://es.openoffice.org/ - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] GetStorage, name: No Content!
On Tue, 2005-06-07 at 08:33 -0700, Carl Shewmaker wrote: Following weekend thunderstorm had problems with lan and accessing internet, since mostly resolved. But when I try to open OpenOffice.org 1.1.4 I get an error message, OpenOffice.org cannot be started due to an error in accessing the OpenOffice .org configuration data. Please contact your system administrator. The following internal error has occurred: GetStorage, name: No Content! Unfortunately, I am the system administrator, now lost, lone and forlorn. Repair did not work. Would appreciate any help. Hi Carl, This is actually one of the highest ranking questions on the knowledgebase. It is a well known problem to do with file corruption unders Windows. Have a look at the OOo knowledgebase for a detailed answer to your error. Regards Jonathon -- OOo Tips (RSS) - http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/tips.rss OOo Knowledgebase - http://mindmeld.cybersite.com.au/ Cybersite Consulting - http://www.cybersite.com.au/ Training4Linux - http://www.training4linux.com - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[discuss] WIPO Online Forum on Intellectual Property in the Information Society
Some of you that are interested in intellectual property and OSS may wish to comment on the themes presented as part of the WIPO Online Forum on Intellectual Property in the Information Society, see: http://www.wipo.int/ipisforum/en/ It started at the beginning of the month, but has a few days to go. The themes are presented in English, and you can add a comment in any language. All the best Jacqueline McNally Lead, OpenOffice.org Marketing Project - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [discuss] Re: HBS WK: Who will win Microsoft or Linux?
Chuck wrote: My point is that OSS will never be more than a small niche compared to commercial software. It is such a small niche that microsoft has announced that they have lost, and will continue to lose market share in the desktop, and office suite, due to FLOSS products. free = piece of crap, expensive equals great software with great support. Perceptions rule. Microsoft has admitted that without FUD, they will lose market share faster than they have been. OSS has been available for years to fill many needs and yet it never garners more than 1-2% of the market. Market share measurements of FLOSS have never been reliable. I haven't looked at any market share data recently, but the last time I did, Linux BSD were the OS of choice for servers. Linux had a 20% market share on desktops. OOo had a 10% market share in office suites. Firefox/Thunderbird/Mozilla had between a 5% and 10% market share. You would do well to remember what the most popular and most used browser, and email client at One Microsoft Way is. They are all superior to their commercial counterparts but are no where near replacing them in the market. a) FLOSS is barely past the stage of being just good enough. EG: Calc is nowhere near the equal of Excel, for heavy number crunchers. [The people who spend $1K+ for a spreadsheet template.] For most people, OOo is just good enough. b) FLOSS suffers from a distinct lack of good, effective marketing. Firefox is better than MIE, but it (Firefox) suffers from an extreme lack of marketing to Joe Sixpack. xan jonathon -- A Fork requires: Seven systems with: 1+ GHz Processors 2+ GB RAM 0.25 TB Hard drive space - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
