Favorite Files

No favorite files added yet

Recent Posts

1. Comment - Librarians Voice Support for OpenDoc

   (Dec 21, 2005 - 3:51 PM)

   Oy, so much muddled thinking, I don't know where to start. Virtual Telekenesis (sic) Link? You've been watching too much Battlestar Gallactica, my friend.
   
   It is precisely because things will be so different in the future that we should think about access to these documents in posterity. That the storage and transport mediums will change is irrelevant. It is the access to the content which open formats address. Document format is different from document storage medium. Format is how the bits are arranged and interpreted, storage is how the bits are saved. The format will persist whether stored on a thumb drive or bio-mechanical nerve endings.
   
   The need for access to content will never be obsolete. Plato is still relevant today. But you are never not going to require protocols for communication & formats for information - there will always be a need for organization in communication, no matter what the form. These are enduring requirements no matter how different the means of transfer and exchange become.
   
   Even if there is mind-reading in the future, information transfer will require protocol and format. And the only way to guarantee full access to content is to make these protocols and formats free and open.
   
   Open Source will be oudated? Again, you're confusing dssimilar concepts. Microsoft is a corporation. Its document formats will eventually be replaced.
   
   Open Source is an ideal, a freedom, a principle. That will never become outdated. Will the concepts of Democracy or Individual Freedom become outdated? Open Source will evolve in implementation, but it isn't a thing that obsoleces like a data format.
   
   Suggestion: take two boxes labeled "Apples" & "Oranges", then Sort.

2. Comment - Librarians Voice Support for OpenDoc

   (Dec 21, 2005 - 5:00 AM)

   "Apparently you haven't seen the "Compatability" tab under "Tools->Options..." before..."
   
   And apparently you're making another glib comment, since it's evident that you haven't actually tried this yourself.
   
   The tab you refer to has to do with preferences in how Word behaves within its so-called "compatibility". Just because they call it "compatibility" don't make it so.
   
   When you actually try to open a Word 5 document, it comes up garbled - your formerly embedded and invisible printer information and style sheet info appear as some kind of jumbled page header, and you lose your formatting.

3. Comment - Librarians Voice Support for OpenDoc

   (Dec 18, 2005 - 4:25 AM)

   I can name one: Microsoft Word 5 for DOS.
   
   I happily used this program for years - it did all that I wanted. But Microsoft's own current Word programs won't read these files correctly. Microsoft isn't even compatible with Microsoft. They killed compatibility with the old format to force users to upgrade to the Windows versions of the software. And this inaccessibility didn't even require that Microsoft go out of business!
   
   Sure you may be able to get at the insides of these documents with octal dumps, binary viewers, etc, but that's not the same as being a supported and accessible format.
   
   I'm only certain that your certainty is misplaced. There were so many programs that flourished in the 80's for PCs which used proprietary formats, and databases that existed before the availabiity of ODBC drivers.
   
   Besides, you contradict your own argument by citing ODBC as an example of how the data of these legacy applications are accessible. ODBC is an *Open* format allowing non-proprietary access to the data, in the same way that OpenDoc would allow. If it wasn't for the existence of ODBC, you wouldn't have the kind of access that you cite. You've unwittingly made the argument *for* open formats.