NoOp wrote:
On 06/15/2010 05:14 AM, John Kaufmann wrote:
In a message dated 2010.06.15 02:29 -0500, jonathon wrote:
That alone is already a very interesting way to think about this,
beyond what Dotan originally proposed (or at least draws out more
explicitly an advantage implicit in the original proposal). But
then you make the case even more powerful:
Did you know that there was a macro for OOo 1.1.x that provided that
functionality?
No. But just to be clear, the functionality you refer is this?:
... the recovery aspect [has] a real benefit. As I indicated, the
current system does leave the possibility of having closely
related documents recovered to different points in the workflow.
So it was a macro to link documents fo synchronization, including
synchronized recovery following a document crash? If so, I would love
to see how that worked. If I have misunderstood your point, please correct.
It worked about as well as the equivalent in MSO97. (I don't remember
when Microsoft removed that functionality from MSO.)
I did not know MSO ever had such capability [but my ignorance is vast ;-) ].
John
I am unlcear about the macro & functionality that Jonathan refers to.
However, I do have both OOo 1.1 and MSO97 and can test/check both if he
can clarify. MSO97 is currently operational on a Win2K virtual machine &
it would only take me about and hour to install OOo 1.1 from the
original CD on the same VM.
I *think* these links might be at least related to what Jonathon is
talking about although both refer to software considerably later than
MSO 97 and OOo 1.1:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Groove
http://extensions.services.openoffice.org/project/TeamDrive
--
Harold Fuchs
London, England
Please reply *only* to [email protected]
