Thanks Andrea, I am missing context. Where are you seeing this information and where do you propose to submit the updates?
I have no problem with the proposed changes. Just want to know where they go. Is it meaningful to report that the default and recommended outputs are Extended ODF 1.2 documents (i.e., not "strict" as some want, and not automatically interoperable)? - Dennis -----Original Message----- From: Andrea Pescetti [mailto:pesce...@apache.org] Sent: Saturday, September 5, 2015 03:49 To: dev@openoffice.apache.org Subject: Re: ODF Plugfest: participation and leaflets [ ... ] So, coming to item 2: I'm still hopeful we can provide up-to-date data about OpenOffice. You can find below what is needed, what is currently there and what I propose we send them (which I will have to do on Tuesday morning European time; if someone else takes care of it I'll be happier). NEEDED CURRENT PROPOSED Software (name) Apache Open Office Apache OpenOffice License Open Source Open Source (ALv2) Formats All (no changes) [1] Platforms (empty) Windows, OS X, Linux, third-party ports to Android, FreeBSD, OS/2 Support Community (no changes) [2] Link http://www.openoffice.org/ (no changes) Notes (empty) (empty) [1]: Formats are the ODF file extensions, not the non-ODF file types. [2]: Here the choice is between Community and Commercial. Can we at least agree on this basic information for the "Applications" sections, which is what they need most? Regards, Andrea. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
