On Thu, 21 Feb 2008 18:06:54 -0800, Tim Smith wrote:
> In article <UYidnUFlnevJhCPanZ2dnUVZ_gidnZ2d@xxxxxxxxxxxx>,
> alt <spamtrap@xxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> > And the sad thing is, it would be possible to come up with a format
>> > that is pretty close to ODF, but that has the legacy support
>> > Microsoft needs, and many in OASIS wanted to do that, and Microsoft
>> > likely would have supported it, but Sun wouldn't allow it.
>> >
>> > We could have one format that would have truly become universal. Oh
>> > well, I forgot--choice is good, so I guess it is supposed to be good
>> > that people will have to deal with two formats for the foreseeable
>> > future.
>>
>> Why should the document format support all of Microsoft's
>> (undocumented) legacy crap? Shouldn't that be the job of the
>> application?
>
> The application needs to be able to save information about that legacy
> "crap", hence there is a need for some way to do that in the document
> format.
I still don't understand. All conceivable objects in a document can be
expressed in non-proprietary methods. The application should be the one
doing the conversion from proprietary to non-proprietary methods.
|
|
