OASIS Mailing List ArchivesView the OASIS mailing list archive below
or browse/search using MarkMail.


Help: OASIS Mailing Lists Help | MarkMail Help

office message

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]

Subject: Re: [office] List Proposal Vote Deadline on Wednesday

On Thursday 03 May 2007 23:15:26 marbux wrote:
> On 5/2/07, Thomas Zander <zander@kde.org> wrote:
> > Its the other way around; WW has a 2 key model, with this vote ODF
> > has a 3 key model.  So its simple to emulate a 2 key model in a 3
> > keys one by ignoring one key.
> Am I wrong that it isn't all one way? The Foundation is working on a
> plugin for Microsoft Office and so is Sun, as I understand the
> situation. Won't they have to somehow implement a 3-key model in a
> 2-day model in their plugins, given that they can't rewrite MS Word's
> page layout engine?

Sorry, marbux, you are not making any sense.
If there are features in ODF that MS does not have, how do you think the 
ODF TC should behave?
Since that is exactly what you are asking here, you are asking for us to 
not add features that WW can't handle as that might mean that docs 
created in OOo etc can't be coverted to WW.

And how you (have been) react(ing) speaks volumes, I lost a big chunk of 
my respect for you today.

> > Now; I'm afraid I won't go into details on the rest of your mail.  I
> > said that as far as I know there is no such problem as you state
> > there is, and there are quite some people on this list that share my
> > feelings. In fact; even Florian never stated clearly that he thinks
> > its impossible to have full interop with the now ok-ed proposal.
> >
> > I understand you have worries, and I fully agree that full interop is
> > important. I'm surprised you do not know this since we have been
> > talking for a long time now.
> I thought I knew that, which is why I was surprised you would press a
> vote on the issue without knowing whether it would create an
> interoperability barrier with MS Office.

1) I never pushed for a vote.
2) I am very certain there is no interoperability barrier; I just 
suggested we suspend the talking and let me do some work we can actually 

> > I also understand that with some 4 people on the TC not sharing your
> > worries, and you still feel worried that the only way to solve this
> > issue is to actually go ahead and implement this stuff.  Which means
> > research and which means it will take time. I don't do this as a full
> > time job, and your pressuring me does not have any positive effect.
> > Sorry.
> >
> > Bottom line;
> > I think the worries are unfounded.  If you have proof to the
> > opposite, we can talk. If not, I hope you will not make a scene.
> Please help me here, Thomas. In particular, I need to know whether
> this barrier -- if it proves to be a barrier -- will be fixed before
> ODF 1.2 is released for a  ballot by the OASIS membership. 

With just about everyone technical on this TC telling you there is no 
problem, I am surprised, naj, disappointed you are still pushing.

> As I explained, I'm dead in the water on my ODF advocacy work until
> this issue is resolved and I am unwilling to accept an open-ended
> postponement of its resolution, particularly in the absence of a
> commitment to fix the problem if it turns out there is a barrier.

Your choice.
I choose to spent my spare time on things other then to take away your 
unfounded paranoia.

Thomas Zander

PGP signature

[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]