Readers,
Have done a bug report on both LO and AOO, about the 'changes' feature
of the word processor. (It's excellent that there are multiple
products available to produce ODF files, but I digress). There are
many bugs concerning this feature, which is surprising.
In the typical collaborative environment, the superior functionality
of m$ "track changes" makes the possibility to use LO unrealistic.
Suppose LO is used to create an original odt document (the preferred
option of course). When that file is distributed to m$ users, the
functionality of 'changes' in LO will probably be considered to be
weak and people will be justified to ask: "please send an m$ word
document".
What is the experience of others distributing odt documents to m$ users?
Alternatively, the "realpolitik" option is to use LO to create an m$
word document, but as commented before, such an option merely
perpetuates the proliferation of m$ at the direct cost to odf.
Which leads to the next question: is the priority to improve the
feature of LO such that 'changes' in odt format is superior to 'track
changes' in m$ and that when odt documents are distributed, m$ users
can perform simple tasks such as recording document changes?
Or is the priority for LO to be compatible with m$, so that m$ word
continues to be the de facto standard?