[odf-discuss] News on MS pluggin

[Thomas Zander]

On Sunday 15 October 2006 15:21, Alex Hudson wrote:
> > In the end I don't see any of the problems you see with the points marbux
> > made. In fact, I think the best thing for Ms actually is to use an
> > intermediate binary format (in memory) in order to avoid regressions.
>
> Whether or not it's the best way is beside the point - I haven't seen
> any evidence of that being MS' implementation strategy anywhere, and I
> try to keep up with OXML developments.

The point I was trying to make is that explicit evidence for this behavior is 
IMO not needed. More to the contrary.
Its ockham's razor.

Using the intermediate bin-format does does not pose big problems, is actually 
the easiest way to implement it (since it avoids major refactoring) and does 
not significantly slow things down.

So, what is more likely, the 2 step loader, or that microsoft did major 
refactoring to their office codebase to allow separate loading from an xml. 
Because major refactoring would be needed since there wasn't really a loader 
before. Just a 'fill all variables with bytes from the file'.

Anyway, thats how I look at it. But naturally none of us can say what Ms 
actually did without decompiling the app :)
-- 
Thomas Zander
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20061015/c2f07b71/attachment-0002.pgp