> Microsoft has broken compatability and interoperability with not just > one existing program but several. > http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/update-on-odf-spreadsheet.html > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument_software >
You mean to say that deficiencies in the ODF specification led to the scenario where different software can render the same document in different ways. OOo is _not_ a reference implementation of ODF. > I'd like to also point out that the original press release by Microsoft > about Office SP2 had the subtitle "Move enhances customer choice and > interoperability with Microsoft's flagship productivity suite." > http://www.microsoft.com/presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx > It does not do that. > Any application that chooses to render ODF like MSO renders ODF is interoperable. OOo can be such an application if it chooses. > They have come in late in the life of ODF V1.1 with a version that > breaks on many existing documents. Version 1.1 is a document format not > under ongoing development. > > V1.2 is developing the reference implementation being talked about. > Version 1.2 is the next version to go through ISO/IEC standardisation > and now the OASIS TC have capped the feature creep issue it should > proceed apace. > > So to Tim Smiths suggestions i reply - this is an established format > with existing interoperability between multiple software > implementations. What Microsoft has done is run in and spike the > football on the playing field, then ask "Now, who wants to play with my > ball?". It is the boundary line between steps one and two of Embrace, > Extend and Extinguish. > Good analogy. I say that OOo play ball. OOo is certain _not_ to win if it doesn't. -- Dotan Cohen http://what-is-what.com http://gibberish.co.il --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: users-unsubscr...@openoffice.org For additional commands, e-mail: users-h...@openoffice.org
