Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] More Adoption of ODF, Now at Hancom

Hash: SHA1

Hancom to lose government office monopoly

,----[ Quote ]
| This is important news. The crucial paragraph:
| "The National Assembly Research Service 
| (NARS), a parliamentary unit that provides 
| policy research and analysis for legislators, 
| now claims that government organizations 
| should be required to use software products 
| that support open standards. The idea is to 
| eventually allow government documents to be 
| created, read and edited by a wider variety of 
| office applications run on any type of 
| computer operating system, NARS said."
| But let's continue:
| [...]
| Supposedly, according to an Hancom 
| spokesperson, "``ODF is supported on Hancom 
| Office 2010, which was released last year." 
| But I do wonder what "supported" means here; 
| as well, as the article points out...



The OOXML interoperability scam

,----[ Quote ]
| Every time the Microsoft Office team
| pushes a comment on the wire, there is
| another pledge for interoperability. It
| has been so common for the last few years
| that if you haven't actually watched what
| it might mean, pretty much OOXML is
| synonym with interoperability.
| Of course, it does not matter that the
| word interoperability alone does not mean
| anything. That is why Microsoft uses it so
| much. You can pretty much put an
| interoperability label to anything as long
| as it is not accurately defined. Does it
| mean document-level interoperability?
| Application-level interoperability? Or,
| perhaps is it just Microsoft-only
| interoperability (a good guess!)?
| The pledge for interoperability cannot
| possibly mean document-level
| interoperability since we are not there :
| OOXML is full of non-XML streams, barely
| defined at all (the official papers lack
| everything related to international
| features, and that is just one example),
| so that ends any serious discussion
| precociously. In the remainder of his
| article, I'll be taking a look at
| application-level interoperability, in
| case Microsoft means that.
| [...]
| Simple tests like this leave me a bit
| speechless when you see that Microsoft
| Office is supposed to be the rolls royce
| of Office programs in the world, the de
| facto standard. And in fact it's just
| crap. On the contrary OpenOffice, the free
| suite, is actually a more serious product
| when it comes to application-level
| interoperability. This had to be said...

Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index