On 2011-09-12, Dotan Cohen wrote: > On Sun, Sep 11, 2011 at 23:41, Anthony Papillion > <anth...@cryptofreaks.tk> wrote: >>> MS don't implement their standard in the way that they wrote they >>> would. Having set a standard anyone that follows that standard is >>> guaranteed to produce things that are a little wonky when opened in >>> MS Office. LO devs work at getting LO's implementation as wonky as >>> MS's but the wonkiness is the unknown factor. >> >> Ok, I can accept that. But then, aren't we back to a 'secret format'? >> If I implement a standard to write out a file a certain way and do it >> in another way that isn't documented then I'm not following the >> standard and, thus, my filetype is secret. The only way it's *not* >> secret is if they file is written to the standard without any >> deviations. [...] > > By that logic, LO uses a secret format as well. LO and OpenOffice.org > deviate from the ODF standard in more documented ways than MS Office > deviates from OOXML.
Yes, there are deviations. I even remember threads about LibO files failing ODF validation. But, as LibreOffice is free software, its source is open. So people who want to find out how exactly are LibO ODF files generated can check the source. -- Nuno J. Silva (aka njsg) gopher://sdf-eu.org/1/users/njsg -- For unsubscribe instructions e-mail to: users+h...@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
