In later years, whenever the issue of compatibility with Microsoft file formats or interoperability with Microsoft applications came up, which was often, the final word ending discussion was invariably, "That's outside the charter and out of scope".
... The hard truth is that ODf was not designed for the conversion of existing MSOffice documents, applications and processes. MS-OOXML on the other hand, was designed exactly for this purpose. And that's the challenge we're up against.
Actually MS isn't so wrong there...
"The OASIS committee did not focus on the requirements, constraints, and experiences of Microsoft customers."
That is most certainly true. The format is heavily based on the requirements, constraints, and experiences of
*Sun* customers and KOffice users and developers though, and nothing says that
those requirements are totally different. But for sure we didn't target *Microsoft*'s customers.
The art of implying something without actually saying so...
"Almost no material changes" is certainly exaggerated, but yes, ODT is mostly
bsaed on OO-1.1, it wasn't completely redesigned; see below.
On notera qu'il ajoute aussi :
MS is just forgetting that the OD format was designed from the start to be as much independent
as possible from the implementation of the office suite applications, and that's why it
was a great basis for a standard.
Has the Abiword team participated with the ODF spec?
We were asked to join the review committee, but we didn’t accept.
Why not?
In contrast to what everyone was saying, we would be far too small to make any real change. ODT is basically run by the big corporations like Sun, Novell and IBM. It would be naive to assume there was anything we could change about the format.
... Any comments on ODF as the default format? There was a 2004 discussion, but has anything changed after that?
No. We will not make it our default file format. Our internal model does not map 100% to ODT and visa versa (basically because ODT is nothing more than a dump of OpenOffice.org’s internal format).
Ca fait plusieurs sources independantes, versees dans le sujet, qui disent la meme chose...
Bref, ils n'ont clairement jamais ete interesses a etre interoperable avec 95% du marche... Traduis ca comme tu veux...
[^] # Re: Oui bien sur
Posté par pasBill pasGates . En réponse à la dépêche En vrac : ODF by MS, Torcs, FireUnit, Facebook et le libre, Project:Possibility. Évalué à 0.
In later years, whenever the issue of compatibility with Microsoft file formats or interoperability with Microsoft applications came up, which was often, the final word ending discussion was invariably, "That's outside the charter and out of scope".
...
The hard truth is that ODf was not designed for the conversion of existing MSOffice documents, applications and processes. MS-OOXML on the other hand, was designed exactly for this purpose. And that's the challenge we're up against.
Un peu plus de lecture par Gary Edwards : http://linuxfr.org/~MSUSA/25232.html
David Faure :
http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/opendocument-users/2005(...)
Actually MS isn't so wrong there...
"The OASIS committee did not focus on the requirements, constraints, and experiences of Microsoft customers."
That is most certainly true. The format is heavily based on the requirements, constraints, and experiences of
*Sun* customers and KOffice users and developers though, and nothing says that
those requirements are totally different. But for sure we didn't target *Microsoft*'s customers.
The art of implying something without actually saying so...
"Almost no material changes" is certainly exaggerated, but yes, ODT is mostly
bsaed on OO-1.1, it wasn't completely redesigned; see below.
On notera qu'il ajoute aussi :
MS is just forgetting that the OD format was designed from the start to be as much independent
as possible from the implementation of the office suite applications, and that's why it
was a great basis for a standard.
mais si j'en crois les gens d'Abiword, ils sont du meme avis que MS... : http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/05/08/abiword-team-interv(...)
Has the Abiword team participated with the ODF spec?
We were asked to join the review committee, but we didn’t accept.
Why not?
In contrast to what everyone was saying, we would be far too small to make any real change. ODT is basically run by the big corporations like Sun, Novell and IBM. It would be naive to assume there was anything we could change about the format.
...
Any comments on ODF as the default format? There was a 2004 discussion, but has anything changed after that?
No. We will not make it our default file format. Our internal model does not map 100% to ODT and visa versa (basically because ODT is nothing more than a dump of OpenOffice.org’s internal format).
Ca fait plusieurs sources independantes, versees dans le sujet, qui disent la meme chose...
Bref, ils n'ont clairement jamais ete interesses a etre interoperable avec 95% du marche... Traduis ca comme tu veux...