Cart
|
[XML-DEV Mailing List Archive Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries] [Reply To This Message] Re: Common Word Processing Format
 On Fri, 2005-12-02 at 10:55 -0500, Robert Koberg wrote: > Uche Ogbuji wrote: > > On Tue, 2005-11-29 at 11:00 -0800, Nathan Young -X (natyoung - Artizen > > at Cisco) wrote: > > > >>If we're talking about a document format to replace MS word documents, > >>we need much more than XHTML. XHTML holds the content of the document > >>and provides (some) semantic information about that content. To > >>replicate what a word doc can do and does do for most users, you have to > >>also specify how it's going to display and probably provide some > >>information to the application about how the editing experience should > >>be presented. > > > > > > I don't know why I'm even bothering with such a hopelessly subjective > > debate, but since everyone here seems to be so eager to crown XHTML for > > office formats, I'll pip up and say say: > > > > Thank GODDESS for the OO XML project, Microsoft's partially reformed > > Office XML format team, and all others who are saving us from the abject > > horror of having to contemplate XHTML as an office file format. > > > > Are you kidding me? > > > > All arguments for XHTML everywhere eventually boil down to arguments > > that rather than > > > > <monty> > > <python/> > > </monty> > > no. you are missing the point. No one is stopping you from using > whatever you want internally for your self, your department, your > company or between companies if you want. But, if you want to let > someone who is not necessarily in the loop see it, put it in a format > that makes the most sense. I cannot see how that is MS Office or Open > Office. Even worse is having a state impose it upon its citizens. > Say you are in charge of your states IT budget, how do you present your > structure above to your citizens/vendors/buearocrats? Do you present > your structure above as an MSOffice or OOWrite document? Len Bullard had a similar reply, but as I read the thread, the discussion had broadened from the needs of one state to Office Format best practice in general. If you still meant the discussion in narrow context, I don't think that was clear, and thus my reaction. I certainly don't deign to tell MA how to write technology policy. I haven't analyzed their problem domain. > > I should write: > > > > <div class="monty"> > > <span class="python"/> > > </div class"monty"> > > > > No bloody thank you. Freedom from naming-by-committee is what drew me > > to XML in the first place. I am not about to chuck that freedom for the > > very false comfort of a protean generic identifier. > > have you /looked/ at the XML source for either of the office suites? I was on the OO XML OASIS WG for a few moths at the beginning, and the final product is not radically different from what we started with. I have not really seen much of the new Office XML. > Given that you can't do what you want in OOWrite and only painfully and > with a bad UI in MSWord, why are you celebrating those formats? Can't do what I want? I don't follow. -- Uche Ogbuji Fourthought, Inc. http://uche.ogbuji.net http://fourthought.com http://copia.ogbuji.net http://4Suite.org Articles: http://uche.ogbuji.net/tech/publications/ 
|
PURCHASE STYLUS STUDIO ONLINE TODAY!Purchasing Stylus Studio from our online shop is Easy, Secure and Value Priced! 
Download The World's Best XML IDE!Accelerate XML development with our award-winning XML IDE - Download a free trial today! Subscribe in XML format
|
|||||||||
