<div dir="ltr"><br><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote">On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 10:36 AM, timofonic timofonic <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:timofonic@gmail.com" target="_blank">timofonic@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div><div>Hello.<br><br></div>I'm an humble and unskilled user, but here's my opinion:<br><br></div>- I personally think technologies like ActiveX are a double sword, they help others to get attached to the Microsoft ecosystem. This technology isn't an open standard and has potential security risks.<br></div>- I see this issue is taken serious with ActiveX, but there's another dangerous technology: Java.<br></div>* Do you remember what happened with Oracle vs Java? They are switching to OpenJDK, but personally I think that environment is poisoned by a corporation as greedy and corrupt like microsoft.<br></div>* I think Java is a security risk, not so multiplatform in reality and not so efficient. It should be avoided and eliminated from LO codebase.<br><br><br></div>What about making Python and Lua more important in LibreOffice?<br></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>My first thoughts: Python and Lua are languages. Windows is an OS, meaning ActiveX works on Windows with any language that supports it, allowing the code which runs under ActiveX to be ported to any other application natively on Windows.<br><br>Windows is no small OS. In 2015, it still maintains over 80% marketshare of all desktop OSes:<br><a href="http://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0">http://netmarketshare.com/operating-system-market-share.aspx?qprid=10&qpcustomd=0</a><br><br>Plus, Python directly supports ActiveX and can import into itself, and I believe with ActivePython can also export:<br><a href="http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12039174/python-activex-automation">http://stackoverflow.com/questions/12039174/python-activex-automation</a><br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div><div><div><div></div>- Lua:<br>* It's extremely lightweight and it did born for configure files.<br>* It can be used to replace certain native code that is difficult to maintain or prone to lots of changes.<br></div>* You can use a JIT or compile it as native code, there are different approachs.<br></div>* It could make LibreOffice more customizable: Do you think LibreOffice UI is awful? Are you a keyboard junkie that is used to console text editors? Do you have some disability that requires a specific interface (visual, tactile, eye movement, voice...) No problem if the UI could be easy to adapt to make it work in different ways.<br></div></div></div></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>I have no experience with Lua. <br></div><div> </div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div><div><div><div></div>- Python<br></div>* There's UNO: Who uses it?<br></div>* What about using the more faster Python implementations?<br></div></div></blockquote><div><br></div><div>Blender uses a background python interface. It allows for some really nice features, though most everything is done through the GUI for most users.<br> <br></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div dir="ltr"><div></div><div>I think LibreOffice needs to have a more disruptive and innovative approach:<br><br></div><div>- I always considered emacs something very interesting, but not practical.<br>* elisp and lack of multithreading make it very unusable.<br></div><div>* It's unusable until you master it. It's good you can do some magic with programming skills and get used to keyboard use, but there should be a friendly start and the default mode should be easy for unskilled computer users.<br></div><div>* Despite of that, the Emacs community is impressive: There's constant loads of new extensions for it, very enthusiast users t the level some of them are unfortunately zealots.<br><br></div><div>- I'm jealous of Atom, despite being "just" a text editor:<br></div><div>* It has loads of extensions.<br></div><div>* It could be used as an IDE for programing, web development and design.<br></div><div>* But I consider the "web native" apps really resource eaters.<br></div><div><br></div><div>What's the future of LibreOffice? Does it want to be just a Microsoft Office clone?<br></div><div>- Why not make it a more flexible but lightweight at same time?<br></div><div>- What about niches? Engineering, sciences, education, programming.<br></div><div>- What about making it not freeze while saving and all these annoying stuff?<br><br></div><div>I would love:<br><br></div><div>- Writer: The best of a "text processor". Become a powerful ide. Able to edit using markup languages. Able to use DVCS like Git.<br></div><div>- Calc: Make it more advanced<br>* Stadistic features of the old SMPS one or even better.<br>* Integrate CAS (Computer Algebra System) in some reliable and flexible approach: Maxima, SageMath integration, resurrect CmathOOoCAS (it uses Xcas/Giac), CoCoA.<br></div><div>- Make Math a real scientific tool.<br></div><div>* What about merging it with some CAS tool?<br></div><div>* What about provide RPN?<br></div><div>* What about making it able to be used as an advanced scientific calculator and even interoperability with commercial ones?<br></div><div>* It needs some love in the boolean logic features, too.<br></div><div><br></div><div>- All: What about RTCE? Interoperability with e-learning systems like Moodle? Able to be used to embed scientific/technical information like CAD, EDA, 3D?<br><br></div><div>I know my ideas are insane, but that's what my insane mind think about the ideal LO :)<br><br></div><div>Kind regards.<br></div><div><br></div><div>LibreOffice only goes to get the low hanging fruit. It may seem a good approach, but makes it a curse.<br></div></div><div class="gmail_extra"><br><div class="gmail_quote"><div><div class="h5">On Tue, Jan 12, 2016 at 2:03 PM, Rick C. Hodgin <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com" target="_blank">rick.c.hodgin@gmail.com</a>></span> wrote:<br></div></div><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0px 0px 0px 0.8ex;border-left:1px solid rgb(204,204,204);padding-left:1ex"><div><div class="h5">If you search for "Microsoft Excel Automation" you'll find many references<br>
online of how ActiveX is used in other applications to allow the Excel<br>
engine to compute things in a spreadsheet form. Were the same ability<br>
well-documented in LibreOffice, many people would switch as LibreOffice is<br>
free, and Excel costs hundreds of dollars.<br>
<br>
I urge you not to remove it, but to improve it for simpler integration. It<br>
should work like this:<br>
<br>
lo = CreateObject("libreoffice.application")<br>
lo.open("c:\path\to\my\document\file.ext")<br>
lo.visible = .t.<br>
<br>
And in that way, an application can directly integrate operations into<br>
their app which loads LibreOffice. Note that these examples are in Visual<br>
Basic, but the same general form works from any application, including C++<br>
(see below):<br>
<br>
Here are some automation examples for Excel, Word, Outlook, and PowerPoint:<br>
Excel: <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/219151" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/219151</a><br>
Word: <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/316383" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/316383</a><br>
Outlook: <a href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/220595" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/220595</a><br>
<br>
A more example-by-example based tutorial:<br>
PowerPoint:<br>
<a href="https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb871574%28v=vs.80%29.aspx" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/bb871574%28v=vs.80%29.aspx</a><br>
<br>
Here's a code snippet on how to access ActiveX from another application<br>
using C++ from MSDN:<br>
<a href="https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/196776" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">https://support.microsoft.com/en-us/kb/196776</a><br>
<br>
ActiveX allows applications to integrate each other, and to have windowed<br>
portions within an application which are actually a "portal" through to the<br>
other application, though it appears to be fully integrated. It is a<br>
powerful tool. And as I say, I have not used LibreOffice for integration<br>
because I could not find good documentation on how to do it, whereas there<br>
are many online resources on how to use Microsoft Office integration. If<br>
the documentation were better, Windows people would use it as it is highly<br>
desirable.<br>
<br>
Best regards,<br>
Rick C. Hodgin<br>
<br>
<br>
On Mon, Jan 11, 2016 at 9:52 AM, James E Lang <<a href="mailto:jim%2Blod@lang.hm" target="_blank">jim+lod@lang.hm</a>> wrote:<br>
<br>
><br>
><br>
> -----Original Message-----<br>
> From: Bryan Quigley <<a href="mailto:gquigs@gmail.com" target="_blank">gquigs@gmail.com</a>><br>
> To: libreoffice <<a href="mailto:libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org" target="_blank">libreoffice@lists.freedesktop.org</a>><br>
> Sent: Sun, 10 Jan 2016 15:41<br>
> Subject: Re: Remove ActiveX from LibreOffice<br>
><br>
> ---------->8=====<br>
><br>
> >My position on ActiveX is to leave it (lest we break applications in the<br>
> wild,) and to *announce its deprecation* with two goals: first, solicit the<br>
> feedback of LO ActiveX consumers and, if so inclined to continue using it,<br>
> help in its support. And second, to flag a date in the future when ActiveX<br>
> will be completely removed from LO codebase, pending sufficient reason and<br>
> support by its consumers.<br>
><br>
> [Just to toss in a comment from a NOT NECESSARILY typical USER, I would<br>
> probably fail to see any depreciation notice unless it were thrown in my<br>
> face each time I used the feature until I say (in effect), "all right,<br>
> Enough Already, SHUT UP!" aka, "Don't show this notice again." The same<br>
> should apply to revising any existing menu accelerators. --jl]<br>
><br>
> ---------->8=====<br>
</div></div><span><font color="#888888"><div><div class="h5">><br>
> --<br>
> Jim<br>
> _______________________________________________<br>
> LibreOffice mailing list<br>
> <a href="mailto:LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org" target="_blank">LibreOffice@lists.freedesktop.org</a><br>
> <a href="http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/libreoffice</a><br>
><br>
><br>
<br></div></div><span class=""><font color="#888888">
--<br>
To unsubscribe e-mail to: <a href="mailto:discuss%2Bunsubscribe@documentfoundation.org" target="_blank">discuss+unsubscribe@documentfoundation.org</a><br>
Problems? <a href="http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/</a><br>
Posting guidelines + more: <a href="http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette</a><br>
List archive: <a href="http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/" rel="noreferrer" target="_blank">http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/discuss/</a><br>
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted<br>
</font></span></font></span></blockquote></div><br></div>
</blockquote></div><br></div></div>