| |||||||||||||
|
| |||||||||||||
Good article but pity it only talks about word processingGood article but pity it only talks about word processingPosted Nov 29, 2005 11:28 UTC (Tue) by koriordan (guest, #3490)Parent article: Format Comparison Between ODF and MS XML (Groklaw)
A good article and it's nice to see that the OpenDocument text format is superior to the competition.
It would be nice if they did another article for spreadsheets though. After hearing how the Gnumeric team aren't at all impressed with ODS (and I'd trust them to know what they're talking about), I'd be very interesting to hear how it compares with other XML spreadsheet formats.
(Log in to post comments)
Good article but pity it only talks about word processing Posted Nov 29, 2005 21:24 UTC (Tue) by khim (subscriber, #9252) [Link] It would be nice if they did another article for spreadsheets though. After hearing how the Gnumeric team aren't at all impressed with ODS (and I'd trust them to know what they're talking about), I'd be very interesting to hear how it compares with other XML spreadsheet formats.
Have you actually seen reasons why Gnumeric team was not impressed ? ODS was not in fault - lack of information needed to keep formulas compatible was a problem. And this was deliberately not included in ODF: it'll require separate standard of roughly the same size as ODF! I'm pretty sure Microsoft's format does not include this information as well...
Good article but pity it only talks about word processing Posted Dec 10, 2005 15:44 UTC (Sat) by koriordan (guest, #3490) [Link] I've seen the formula stuff alright and I know there's OpenFormula in the works which should sort that out. They also complained that ODS was bloated though and they feared vendors would end up only supporting a subset of ODS. They said the Microsoft format was actually better in that regard.
|
|
||||||||||||