[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [office] [Fwd: Re: [pr] Help for a marketing and technical message]
Thomas, Sophie, all, In order to clarify the context, it's important to explain that this link was sent to some French ministeries by Microsoft with a simple message saying that OOo does not even implement ODF correctly. So the point is not to decide if KOffice implements ODF better than OOo, but to come up with an answer to that. This is also why I put the Adoption TC list in copy. I am wondering about the status of the test suite. I think it's not even in beta. And, what I don't really understand is how you can have both suites having a 100% support of ODF on a general point of view and such a different implementation of ODF at the same time. KOffice looks like a better implementation of ODF than OOo, and that's all right, but looking at OOo's figures there's no way it can reach a 100% support. So what I am asking here is how accurate and complete is this test suite, and what was the background of this tests. Thank you, Charles. Thomas Zander a écrit : > Hi Sophie, > > I'm not quite sure what it is you are asking here. So I'll point out some > generic comments on this issue. > It is a common mistake to that people think that OpenOffice is *the* > benchmark of ODF. It is not, and the results from the testsuite are > accurate (at least, they were when ran last year). > As Charles pointed out, ODF does not have to be 100% implemented in all > compliant office applications, only a small set of functionality has to > be. So if an application has less functionality, it will obviously > implement less of the spec. > > It would be great if OpenOffice would take the output of the testsuite > serious to the point that it regards any and all failing tests as > bugreports so the quality of OpenOffice' ODF support will go up. > > Thanks! > > On Sunday 08 April 2007 18:01, Charles-H. Schulz wrote: > >> sorry for the delay, I'm just back from Hamburg. I'll forward this to >> the ODF TC asap. I guess that -that's a first hint- this is an >> inaccurate way of describing how things work but however much of it may >> be true. It's just that MS manipulated accurate information. >> >> For instance, there are in any standard a set of normative and >> non-normative (facultative) elements. While you must follow accurately >> the normative elements, the other parts of the standard are left to >> your own vision of how things should be implemented. So it may well be >> that these figures are accurate (and yet, I don't fully think so) but >> they have been misrepresented in a way to make OOo look like a poor >> implementation of ODF because sometimes OOo does not fully implement >> the ODF standard, as surprizing as it seems. It's just a choice made >> for any application. >> > > -- Charles-H. Schulz, Associé / Associate Ars Aperta.