Re: [tdf-discuss] Old Bugs

True. However, the good news is that the 2007 and 2010 formats are largely
similar and are XML based. The old formats were binary and kept changing.
Since the format isn't changing as much, and the new format is easier to
reverse-engineer, now is a good opportunity for OOo/LibO to "catch up" and
improve their compatibiltiy filters.

In some ways, OOo/LibO is better at opening old MSO documents than MSO
itself. Why not continue to improve that?
The difficult argument for many people has been to switch to a new document
format that most users can't open. But if you convince people that your
product is easily the best solution for opening the millions of
2003-and-before documents, then that is a clear advantage for your product.
It could be the killer feature that helps convince people to migrate.

Are the areas of poor compatibilty enumerated somewhere? Are these unknown?
Should users continue to report speciifc documents and features they have
trouble importing?

-- T. J.
On Tue, Nov 2, 2010 at 3:06 PM, Charles Marcus <CMarcus@media-brokers.com>wrote:

> On 2010-11-02 12:05 PM, Frank Esposito wrote:
> > File compatibility should be a priority, in the very least opening and
> > saving MSO files with full compatibility
>
> There will *never* be 100% compatibility... like I said earlier, even
> Microsoft doesn't achieve that between different versions of its own
> programs.
>
> --
>
> Best regards,
>
> Charles

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: Email to discuss+help@documentfoundation.org
Posting guidelines: http://netmeister.org/news/learn2quote.html
Archive: http://www.documentfoundation.org/lists/discuss/
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived ***