Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On 11/15/2013 01:46 PM, jonathon wrote: On 11/11/2013 05:13 PM, Ken Springer wrote: You go to the opening web page, http://www.libreoffice.org/, and LO is promoting Version 4. Click download, and as of right now, you end up downloading 4.1.3. But, you go for documentation, and it's for 4.0. Say what?!?!? That is because the LibO program release cycle is much faster than the LibO documentation release cycle. jonathon YES our volunteer documentation people do what they can to keep up with the release cycle, but after you work 40-60 hours a week at your paid job, then deal with family commitments, etc., etc., each person can only have so much time per week to work in writing/editing the books. 4.0.0 came out in December 2012, and 4.1.0 came out the following may. 4.0.6 just came out, which is the last of its line. So we have two lines out and being used right now. 4.2.0 comes out soon as well. Mostly the 4.0 documentation works with the 4.1 line. There will be a few new things in the 4.1 line not covered, but it may not be needed, for now. Each book is over 400 pages. It could be over 100,000 words in each book. So it can take time to go through the material in a 4.0 book to turn it into a 4.1 or 4.2 book. All of the references need to be checked and changed, as needed. All of the images/graphics have to be updated. That takes a lot of time. Then there are the people who double and triple check the information. Well, a simple paperback book could take a year from the rough manuscript to the edited and polished final version for publication. We self-publish the books and have printed copies through a print-on-demand service. If we mess up the documentation somewhere, it is not something we want to re-publish as a sorry but here is the corrected version version of a book. I have seen a few books with version 2 with corrections from the last release on their cover - front or back. So I want to thank all of our volunteers who are part of the documentation team[s]. There are too few of them and too much work for them, but they do their best for our project. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On 11/9/13 12:25 PM, Paul wrote: Interesting article, and indeed it is true that the file format is the most important aspect of the office suite debate, but I think you are a little naive in your assumption that LO should stop doing any other type of marketing. From a programmer's perspective, I think you are right. It's a lot less work. But, from the average users perspective, they don't care. As long as they can exchange their files with everyone they need/want to share with, with no glitches or problems, it makes no difference to them. Those file formats could have been created by Klingons, for all they care. And I am mimicking your third point in your next paragraph. :-) OH!!! You used thirdly twice. grin I've done similar so many times... Firstly, the question of a truly open and compatible format *is* used when discussing the problems with MSO. Secondly, we are so few, that to stop accepting MSO formats would doom us, not convince the vastly larger uneducated crowd that they need to switch. Educating people is a true sore point with me, anymore. I'm tired of answering basic questions about the computer before trying to explain a feature in Program A. And I don't see anyone addressing this issue. No one has good manuals anymore, and online help is truly a poor answer to a book. Consider, if the user doesn't know the computer basics, how is the going to know how to access any computer's help system? There are the occasional programs that do offer good manuals. One that I'm now using, it's a writing program, comes with a 530 page manual. About the only option for most software is to buy a book at the store, and the books always seem to be missing something. I've taken a couple of courses for programs, not because I wanted to learn how to use them (that I already knew), but I wanted to know the class content. Disappointed, every time. They didn't teach you what you could do with the program, they taught you how to use a couple of features. The last one was a local library course on MS Publisher 2007. Did they tell the attendees what the purpose of any DTP program is? Not a peep. Did they tell them how a DTP program can be used? Multi-page newsletters, small books, owner's manuals, etc. Not a peep. They told everyone how to use a built-in template to make flyers. You can do that in any contemporary word processor. Nothing was said about what sets a DTP apart from a word processor. But I'm sure some people went out and bought MS Publisher. sad smile I've downloaded a couple of the LO manuals, and personally found them wanting. The formatting is paper wasteful if you print them out, and very little info. And always out of date, they don't apply to the currently promoted release. What do I mean by that? You go to the opening web page, http://www.libreoffice.org/, and LO is promoting Version 4. Click download, and as of right now, you end up downloading 4.1.3. But, you go for documentation, and it's for 4.0. Say what?!?!? - Slight irritation here. And is 4.1.3 stable enough to attract, and keep, new users? I don't know, but I'd bet most of the features I've found broken over the last couple of years are still broken. :-( And if you go back through this mailing list, you see a lot of recommendations that if the user wants the most stable version, download 3.x.x. Thirdly, most people don't really care, because it doesn't affect them. All that affects them is that they can communicate with others that equally don't care, and so the entrenched establishment is perpetuated. Unless the dominant system is changed out from under them, or the dominant system stops working for them, they won't care. Our job is to slowly erode the dominant system until there no longer is a dominant system. Having the dominant system become as flaky as .docx is only helps us by making the problems actually affect the majority of users, making them care about choices, and making them more likely to make a conscious decision to choose the best alternative. Eroding the dominant system is the *only* way to change the status quo. The question is, how do you accomplish that? First, you have to decide what your target audience is. Businesses, individuals, or both? The answer to that will depend on how you want to promote the product. Businesses will care about interoperability, and the ease of converting or accessing files created with their current software. LO isn't there yet, IMO. If it was, there would be no questions/issues in that regard. I received a letter of reference from a friend to include with a job application, written in Word for Mac, and the screen display was horrid, to say the least. WYSIWYG it was not. If you're trying to convince someone to switch, you can't have this. The hoped for convert isn't going to be happy when they see their document from Program A all screwed up on the monitor. As you said,
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On 11/9/13 5:37 PM, M. Fioretti wrote: On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 14:06:44 PM -0800, Pedro wrote: Two points: 1) LibreOffice only started embedding fonts in ODF files in version 4.1 (released in July 2013); MS Office files have had this ability for YEARS. In my opinion ODF files are NOW starting to be useful as an editable file exchange format. Fair point. I would really put ignoring which fonts are portable in the over-engineered documents category of my post, but you are right that if embedded fonts are a must, ODF isn't ready. Embedding fonts *is* a must. Just because two users each have Times-Roman, for example, it doesn't mean the fonts are identical. So the formatting of the document will change between users. Been there, done that too many times. :-( 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. that's why in the 2001 thread and in many other things I wrote since then I said that the way to practice that advice was to put pressure on public administrations to make them only accept/release in those formats. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... maybe people should start that movement. Start to complain, even if you know that it won't accomplish anything immediately, whenever you are asked or given a .docx file. Otherwise we'll still be here in 2025 to hear from people that receive such files, and the only solution is to give up using LO. Marco -- Ken Mac OS X 10.8.5 Firefox 24.0 Thunderbird 17.0.8 LibreOffice 4.1.2.3 -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Mon, 11 Nov 2013 10:13:49 -0700 Ken Springer snowsh...@q.com wrote: On 11/9/13 12:25 PM, Paul wrote: Interesting article, and indeed it is true that the file format is the most important aspect of the office suite debate, but I think you are a little naive in your assumption that LO should stop doing any other type of marketing. From a programmer's perspective, I think you are right. It's a lot less work. But, from the average users perspective, they don't care. As long as they can exchange their files with everyone they need/want to share with, with no glitches or problems, it makes no difference to them. Those file formats could have been created by Klingons, for all they care. I'm not sure exactly what you are saying here. It sounds like you are just echoing my sentiments :) Businesses will care about interoperability, and the ease of converting or accessing files created with their current software. LO isn't there yet, IMO. Actually, I think LO *is* there. I think it is better at interoperability than MSO, it's just not better at interoperability *with MSO*. I disagree with your premise of the user that does not know how to modify the code is irrelevant. I would argue just the opposite. You're misquoting me; I never said that the *users* were irrelevant, I said that *the fact that not everybody knows how to change the source* is irrelevant. I said that open source believes we should all have the *choice* to change the source if we wish, irrespective of how many of us actually are capable of changing the source. *Very* different. But, I can't tell them they'll have no problems. I'm not talking the inevitable changes in any file format, I'm talking about features that don't work correctly. It's that perceived value that LO is better than staying with whatever product they are currently using. So you're saying that LO has far more features that don't work correctly as opposed to MSO? I honestly don't find that many. Not enough to make me want to use MSO. Not enough to make me tell people I know not to use LO. And even if what you are saying is true, that doesn't speak of LO doing anything wrong, it speaks of LO not yet having managed to reach the same level as MSO. Not an irrelevant discussion, just a different one to the one I was responding to. The potential for self-betterment is what open source is all about. The fact that the potential for good use means that there is lots of use that is poorly implemented is one of the prices that we gladly (though with plenty of grumbles) accept. Though we (should) never stop trying to educate users. Actually, this is taken out of context. I was replying to a whinge about how many documents are poorly written and formatted; I was saying that that had nothing to do with any discussion about marketing free software vs. marketing standard file formats. Paul -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
M. Fioretti: ...shall-we-waste-twelve-more-years-promoting-free-office-suites-instead-of-open-office-formats/ There's no such thing as 'open format'. Any format can only slavishly describe its reference implementation. There is no reference implementation for ODF, except a monstrous ***Office, which was mostly written in German in early 90's. So if you say 'format', you say 'implementation'. Moreover, is the document is 'formatted with spaces', it is so trivial in any format, so interoperability is not the problem. P.S. Why do people like to state that ODF with magically solve the problem with space/CR positioning or hard linebreaks? -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
Don't worry, you can safely ignore Urmas, he's a known troll around these parts; his bias is strongly (and probably paid for by) MS. On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 02:33:04 +0700 Urmas davian...@gmail.com wrote: M. Fioretti: ...shall-we-waste-twelve-more-years-promoting-free-office-suites-instead-of-open-office-formats/ There's no such thing as 'open format'. Any format can only slavishly describe its reference implementation. There is no reference implementation for ODF, except a monstrous ***Office, which was mostly written in German in early 90's. So if you say 'format', you say 'implementation'. Moreover, is the document is 'formatted with spaces', it is so trivial in any format, so interoperability is not the problem. P.S. Why do people like to state that ODF with magically solve the problem with space/CR positioning or hard linebreaks? -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
Paul: Don't worry, you can safely ignore Urmas, he's a known troll around these parts; You're welcome to name a full reference implementation of ODF format not using the OO.o/Staroffice code. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
Paul: ...to do what some company (like Microsoft) thinks you should be able to do, and only if you pay them very well, open source software believes that everybody should be able to do whatever they want. That's the very nature of Open Source: you have the source, change it if you need to. Oh please, change the source to make it possible to have window panes or normal view in the word processor. Hell, people even promise to pay well for them, but nothing happens as those are architectural deficiencies cemented in in 1992. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
As far as I can gather, neither OASIS nor the ODF Technical Committee require a reference implementation, so none has been named. I don't know about the ISO standard, but I would assume this applies there too. That said, OO.o/LO would be considered by most as the reference implementation. As a reference implementation, there generally isn't going to be more than one (otherwise, which one would you refer to when they differed?). However, here is a list of software implementing the format: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_software As a side note, the competing MS format also doesn't have a reference implementation. The only implementation that I am aware of is MSO, which, being proprietary, cannot be a reference, as nobody (other than MSO themselves) can see the code. And it has much bigger problems than just a lack of a reference implementation. Paul On Sun, 10 Nov 2013 02:52:20 +0700 Urmas davian...@gmail.com wrote: Paul: Don't worry, you can safely ignore Urmas, he's a known troll around these parts; You're welcome to name a full reference implementation of ODF format not using the OO.o/Staroffice code. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
Two points: 1) LibreOffice only started embedding fonts in ODF files in version 4.1 (released in July 2013); MS Office files have had this ability for YEARS. In my opinion ODF files are NOW starting to be useful as an editable file exchange format. 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... My 2 cents. -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Shall-we-waste-twelve-more-years-promoting-Free-office-suites-instead-of-tp4082259p4082287.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
[libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
Jay Lozier wrote Also, using ODF formats avoids the tweaking MS apparently does with their formats with each new release. I disagree. ODF has the same problem. That is why LO has an option to save in ODF 1.0/1.1 or 1.2 and even 1.2 extended. ODF has EXACTLY the same problem that accuses DOCX of: even if the file extension is the same, the contents varies according to the office version you used to save it. The ONLY difference is that you can always get the latest fully compatible version of LO for free, unlike MS Office which requires that you to buy the latest office version to have access to the full features of the updated file format. I'm sorry to break this idealism about ODF's perfection... -- View this message in context: http://nabble.documentfoundation.org/Shall-we-waste-twelve-more-years-promoting-Free-office-suites-instead-of-tp4082259p4082290.html Sent from the Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 14:06:44 -0800 (PST) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... Actually, it makes lots of sense for companies to avoid MS formats. It's trying to get them to do that that will be hard. And even if they don't use any themselves, they are almost certainly going to have to accept MS formats from others. This is something we should be advocating (as loudly as possible, even), but we should be aware of the realities, and advocating it as a sane option, not trying to force it down peoples throats. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
I believe that companies should use open formats, but at this point in time I have never seen a company that has moved from the standard MSO formats. This is likely because the majority has not changed to open formats. Once more people adopt using open formats, then we will likely see a change, but for now this is not the reality. Steven Gruspier Electrical Engineering On 11/9/2013 5:38 PM, Paul wrote: On Sat, 9 Nov 2013 14:06:44 -0800 (PST) Pedro pedl...@gmail.com wrote: 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... Actually, it makes lots of sense for companies to avoid MS formats. It's trying to get them to do that that will be hard. And even if they don't use any themselves, they are almost certainly going to have to accept MS formats from others. This is something we should be advocating (as loudly as possible, even), but we should be aware of the realities, and advocating it as a sane option, not trying to force it down peoples throats. -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 14:06:44 PM -0800, Pedro wrote: Two points: 1) LibreOffice only started embedding fonts in ODF files in version 4.1 (released in July 2013); MS Office files have had this ability for YEARS. In my opinion ODF files are NOW starting to be useful as an editable file exchange format. Fair point. I would really put ignoring which fonts are portable in the over-engineered documents category of my post, but you are right that if embedded fonts are a must, ODF isn't ready. 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. that's why in the 2001 thread and in many other things I wrote since then I said that the way to practice that advice was to put pressure on public administrations to make them only accept/release in those formats. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... maybe people should start that movement. Start to complain, even if you know that it won't accomplish anything immediately, whenever you are asked or given a .docx file. Otherwise we'll still be here in 2025 to hear from people that receive such files, and the only solution is to give up using LO. Marco -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Sun, Nov 10, 2013 00:38:21 AM +0200, Paul wrote: This is something we should be advocating (as loudly as possible, even), but we should be aware of the realities, and advocating it as a sane option, not trying to force it down peoples throats. When a public administration demands that you write to them in the official language of your country and its corresponding alphabet (because, even if it's not written anywhere, they obviously couldn't care less of stuff in other ways), are they forcing something down your throat? Formats are like alphabets. Demanding a **format** is not forcing stuff down people throats. Demanding that others use the same software as you do is. Marco -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Sat, Nov 09, 2013 14:21:43 PM -0800, Pedro wrote: The ONLY difference is... can you generate MS Office documents automatically with just a few lines of code as in http://freesoftware.zona-m.net/tag/odf-scripting ? I'm sorry to break this idealism about ODF's perfection... I explicitly say in my post: We will still need, in other words, a decent, sophisticated office format, and that format better be ODF, because it could not be anything else at this point. decent (and only feasible solution), not perfect. Marco -- M. Fioretti http://mfioretti.com http://stop.zona-m.net Your own civil rights and the quality of your life heavily depend on how software is used *around* you -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
On Sat, 2013-11-09 at 14:06 -0800, Pedro wrote: Two points: 1) LibreOffice only started embedding fonts in ODF files in version 4.1 (released in July 2013); MS Office files have had this ability for YEARS. In my opinion ODF files are NOW starting to be useful as an editable file exchange format. 2) Advocating ignoring MS files only makes sense on a personal basis. Por companies that is absurd. Maybe academia could start that movement but it will take time before it reaches the companies... My 2 cents. On point (2), the dominant status of MSO formats will change when enough governments worldwide move to ODF formats. Whether this is by adoption of LO/AOO or by general mandate is not critical -- Jay Lozier jsloz...@gmail.com -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Re: [libreoffice-users] Re: Shall we waste twelve more years promoting Free office suites instead of...
If everyone knows he's a troll why do so many bother responding in such great lengths. Why bother feeding the troll. Everyone knows this, but still so many feel obligated to defend. If you don't feed trolls, they go away. -- Dale Erwin Jr. 28 de Julio 657, Depto. 03 Magdalena del Mar, Lima 17 PERU http://leather.casaerwin.org -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: users+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/users/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
