this needs wide distribution

[Michael Kallas]

Hi,

Am Di, 12.12.2006, 10:36, schrieb Alex Hudson:
> On Tue, 2006-12-12 at 08:34 +0100, Georg C. F. Greve wrote:
>>  http://www.fsfe.org/fellows/greve/freedom_bits/openxml_wrap_up_after_d12k
>
> I have to confess to being worried about asking people not to improve
> free software applications for specific political purposes.

Why? OpenXML is a political issue, Free Software is a political issue.

> For example, the comments on the Microsoft-funded ODF<->OXML converter
> (which is actually the software Novell propose to use, in the short
> term) really confuse me. We should improve software for users of
> proprietary systems, but not use that functionality ourselves?!

OpenXML will never work for users of Free Software (as has been pointed
out now so many times), so every effort to use it is wasted (at best) or
even counterproductive by weakening the only standard Free Software can
implement: ODF.

> Making ODT export from Word easy is one thing. Enshrining Office's
> continuing position as the number 1 implementer of office file formats
> is quite another. For example, I have a document preparation system
> based entirely on ODF, because it's an easy format to develop for, but
> also because by building on top of OpenOffice.org, I can output to a
> variety of other formats.
>
> By giving Office the lead in that area, people like me are going to stop
> using tools like OpenOffice.org and use Office instead, because their
> output will be more widely compatible

Nobody here wants to give MSOffice a lead in this area (ODF is really a
standard, so no one leads here). Better ODF handling is a primer for that,
giving enterprises the chance to
a) cooperate with users using Free Software
b) switch to Free Software

[snip]
>
> The "open standards" thing is less important than getting people to use
> free software.

No, as should get clear from the above.

> Improving the quality of the software and the feature
> set, especially in the office world, is one of the main drivers we have
> to get people to use it.

I don't want 6000+ pages of "features". I don't need them and they never
can be got working.

> Militating against OXML may end up serving no useful purpose than to
> make OpenOffice.org and friends more unusable than they are now.

Trying to include OpenXML would break OOo entirely.

Just my 2 cents
Michael Kallas
-- 
Nobody can save your freedom but YOU -
become a fellow of the FSF Europe! http://www.fsfe.org/en