Henrik Sundberg wrote:
> > If I were doing this, to avoid trying to produce a binary file in a
> > format that is not documented outside of Redmond, I would try
producing
> > a file using the new Office XML format. That might be easier, too.
> >
> >
>
> I didn't think the new format opened in older versions of office. I
> don't think we want to require our customers to have Office 2007.
Does
> OOo support the new format?
>
That format was introduced with Office 2003. OOo 2.x supports it.
Do we have a license problem here?
I browsed this story: http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1829355,00.asp
And this:
http://www.zdnet.com/5208-11048-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=14384&messageID=288763&start=0
(I googled "Office XML license")
Is OOo really allowed to implement Microsoft's XML?
I'm no expert and am new to OOo, but since I'm already in the thread....
my impression was that the only requirement with using the MS format was
noting that you did so. Seems pretty relaxed. I can't see anything in
the LGPL license which would prevent giving credit to the file format
being used.
Dave
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
