Date: prev next · Thread: first prev next last
2011 Archives by date, by thread · List index

I actually agree wholeheartedly with Italo here - please do not try
to hamstring the developers with your (or our) own preferences! The
idea of community discussion is to guide developers, not to instruct
them to do the impractical or impossible and equally not to instruct
them (for whatever reason) *not* to do what can be done.

On the other hand, though I have already done so in another message, I
am more than happy to discuss why some options are more or less
pragmatic for developers and will do so inline with Italo's comments
as quoted below:-

On 02/01/2011 18:47, Italo Vignoli wrote:
On 1/2/11 7:15 PM, Larry Gusaas wrote:

No, that was not the point. Italo Vignoli wrote: "LibreOffice
writes OOXML and will write OOXML, and this is not under
discussion." That is the point I objected to.


I am a member of the Steering Committee, and I totally second this 
decision just because it makes sense for the users (as I have tried
to explain in another message). LibreOffice is the office suite
with the widest document format support, and this is a plus.

This is, and long has been, a *major* plus for both OpenOffice and now
for LibreOffice - we do need to keep this as an objective.

As long as OOXML is a standard recognized by ISO, it makes sense
to support it completely. This is different from the fact that we
are trying to make ODF the only winning standard, and that we are
telling people that they should not use OOXML.

Again, this is exactly the point I also made - although I did perhaps
attribute a little more evil to Microsoft by suggesting the issues
with OOXML may be a deliberate move to capture that standards
compliant high-ground from us.


TDF is a community driven project, not a mailing list driven
project. Community is not just writing in a mailing list, is a lot
different and a lot more than that. I do not think that we ever
gave the perception that this is a mailing list driven project.

Well said, Italo!

Where the wider community has something relevant to say on this, it
should begin from the presumption that we somehow *will* write OOXML
to the best practical ability of the developers. That, not personal
preferences, is the real issue.

I remain convinced that it is for all practical purposes not possible
to write OOXML in the currently active Microsoft format since that is
both a rapidly moving target and might leave us open to claims of
patent-breaking unless we can demonstrate clear reverse-engineering of
the format. Even if we could do that, we would then face the problem
of the target rapidly moving away from us.

Rather than play a "catch up to Microsoft" game, it remains my view
that we should write OOXML in the ISO-standard format for so long as
that standard lasts. That gives Microsoft the chance to either catch
up and use the standard they set themselves or to change the standard
so that they can meet it. In either case, LibreOffice would be ahead
of the game Microsoft plays rather than behind, provided we do make
sure to pop up a warning to remind users we are using the standard and
Microsoft may not yet be able to deal with it.

Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to
*** All posts to this list are publicly archived for eternity ***


Privacy Policy | Impressum (Legal Info) | Copyright information: Unless otherwise specified, all text and images on this website are licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 3.0 License. This does not include the source code of LibreOffice, which is licensed under the Mozilla Public License (MPLv2). "LibreOffice" and "The Document Foundation" are registered trademarks of their corresponding registered owners or are in actual use as trademarks in one or more countries. Their respective logos and icons are also subject to international copyright laws. Use thereof is explained in our trademark policy.