[odf-discuss] Documenting support for ODF 1.1?

[marbux]

On 6/2/07, Daniel <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:
>
> marbux wrote:
> >> Marbux, does this mean that your beef with the proposal is that it adds
> >> a feature to ODF that MS Word doesn't have?
> >>
> > No. That was Thomas' characterization.
>
> That is the message I gather from your statements:
>
> For all: WW = "Windows Word"
>
> Thomas> WW has a 2 key model, with this vote ODF has a 3 key model.
> Thomas> So its simple to emulate a 2 key model in a 3 keys one by
> Thomas> ignoring one key.
>
> Marbux> Am I wrong that it isn't all one way? The Foundation is working
> Marbux> on a plugin ... Won't they have to somehow implement a 3-key
> Marbux> model in a 2-day [key] model in their plugins...?
> ...
> Marbux> starting from the problem list tuples of Windows Word ("WW")
> Marbux> heading into KWord with its list triples, an ODT 1.0 app with
> Marbux> list tuples and back to WW via the foundation plug-in.
>
> Marbux> WW in-memory binary representation > daVinci ODF > KWord > ODT
> 1.0 app > da vinci > WW in-memory-binary-representation
>
>
> In other words, it looks like your beef is that ODF would have a feature
> not present in Windows Word (WW) and that would affect round-tripping
> with the Foundation plugin.


Still no cigar.


Daniel.
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20070602/2fa6cce0/attachment-0001.htm