| |||||||||||||
BadBunny? Only if you invite it inBadBunny? Only if you invite it inPosted Jun 15, 2007 9:09 UTC (Fri) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164)Parent article: BadBunny? Only if you invite it in
I can understand the need of scripting in an application, be it office or not, but why would these scripts have to be bundled with DOCUMENTS? Why not disallow having scripts in documents, and having a separate macro file? PPL have a reason to read documents, even from untrusted sources (they're funny) but not (or very rarely) run macro's...
(Log in to post comments)
BadBunny? Only if you invite it in Posted Jun 15, 2007 18:03 UTC (Fri) by dps (subscriber, #5725) [Link] I dropped in a prosopal, which might actually happen, of having a "run in sandbox" option which would allow macros which do things like keep the section numbers current (or whatever) *within* a document but not mess with other documents, the fact they are in the sandbox, etc.
Most people just say yes, and ignore the consequences, so an option that gives them the upside of that without the most dangerous consequences is arguably desirable. If this option is default people might use it too...
It is also desirable to allow people to contribute better PDF support and similar things (which was initially a third-party OO.o macro, at least as far as I heard it).
|
|||||||||||||