[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread] 

List:       koffice
Subject:    Re: another suggestion for writing new filters
From:       Thomas Zander <zander () planescape ! com>
Date:       2002-07-09 6:19:59
[Download RAW message or body]

On Tue, Jul 09, 2002 at 02:41:54AM +0300, Alexander Dymo wrote:
> 
> > I hate this idea for the same reason that I suspect David gave...its hacky
> > and subject to data loss. Why do you assume that openwriter has the
> > semantics required to support all these formats? Its pretty obvoous to me
> > that all programs of a given class have different features. Reducing them
> > to a single format is a bad idea - once you have lost data, there is no way
> > back.
> 
> So, why we are talking about using OOo file format? 
Who is? Where?

> KWord and OOWriter
> are different. May be it would be wiser to not to restrict KWord to the
> foreign file format?

Nobody is saying we should.  Or am I missing some mailing list?

Please also read
    http://lists.kde.org/?l=koffice-devel&m=102409290721695&w=2
and the rest of the thread.

> Again, there are so many problems with this, so the time required on
> adopting KWord to OOo file format can be better used to improve own
> filters and/or libraries (vw2?).

The feeling we have (of not being able to fix the filters for lack of time) is
something at least 3 other suites have as well.  Move forward one solution and
one framework for filters and you can triple your man power and (since the work
on that filter will mean something for all) people will actually like doing it
again :)

-- 
Thomas Zander                                           zander@planescape.com
                                                 We are what we pretend to be

[Attachment #3 (application/pgp-signature)]
____________________________________
koffice mailing list
koffice@mail.kde.org
To unsubscribe please visit:
http://mail.kde.org/mailman/listinfo/koffice

[prev in list] [next in list] [prev in thread] [next in thread]