Re: [tdf-discuss] Re: Status of .docX etc.

On 14/12/11 11:27, Harold Fuchs wrote:
> "e-letter" <inpost@gmail.com> wrote in message
> news:CAET1fe6jeCR1769v-0yaDhUMw78v0pH4P2O+0T1jeg9B8=eC2w@mail.gmail.com...
> > On 13/12/2011, Harold Fuchs <hwfa.gmanenews@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > Would someone please either explain or point me at a detailed
> > > explanation of
> > > the current status of  LO vis à vis the "new" MS office document formats
> > > docx, xlsx etc.
> >
> > Here we go again: please explain why you can't afford to buy m$???
> >
> > Have you written to m$ to ask for an explanation why: (1) m$ cannot
> > write to odf standards;
> >
> > (2) m$ cannot write to m$ooxml itself
>
> I don't want to buy m$. I don't want to engage with m$. But occasionally
> I need to be able to exchange documents with other, less enlightened
> people. As Aleksandr Orlov would say: simples.

It could also be that the governments accepts it as an exchange format for
documents in their sector. In Norway it's still under governmental
observation.
ODF 1.1 on the other hand has been mandatory since January 1. 2010.
All documents made previously before this date must be converted in 2014.

http://www.regjeringen.no/nb/dep/fad/dok/rundskriv/2009/referansekatalogen.html?id=570673

Thus, we must be able to open older documents made in OOXML not yet
converted etc.

– Olav

-- 
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to discuss+help@documentfoundation.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.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted