[odf-discuss] Interop between multiple standards and multiple applications [new thread]

[Chris Puttick]

On 16/11/2007, Peter Vandenabeele <peter at vandenabeele.com> wrote:
<snip>
>
> Using such an interop profile on "our" side, will not guarantee that we
> (ODF users) can read all the exported .doc documents (and represent
> all those features in .odt format upon conversion), but at least it will
> guarantee that any .odt (and ODF in general) that we _write_, can be
> read and rendered exactly by the users of the current market dominant
> office suites. And maybe this is the most important direction to start
> with. "We" know and understand there are problems upon importing e.g.
> .doc files and are prepared to tolerate such transition problems for a
> short time. But the new users, that are unaware of (and uninterested in)
> the ODF interoperability details, are able to fully and reliable read the
> ODF documents we send them (using the proposed "interop subset",
> so that we are sure all features can be represented correctly in the
> document object model of the current dominant office applications
> (MS, OO.o, KOffice, Symphony, ...)).

I like the sentiment and the attitude; we just need the spin. Howabout
we call it  "ODF for Microsoft users, also known as ODFlite"? The
restriction can be used to claim ODF is at fault in some way; the
suggested tag makes it clear who is at fault. I also like ODFmini -
any other suggestions?

:)

Chris