<html>
<head>
<base href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/">
</head>
<body>
<p>
<div>
<b><a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_UNCONFIRMED "
title="UNCONFIRMED - FORMATTING: redundancy in content.xml"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136434#c10">Comment # 10</a>
on <a class="bz_bug_link
bz_status_UNCONFIRMED "
title="UNCONFIRMED - FORMATTING: redundancy in content.xml"
href="https://bugs.documentfoundation.org/show_bug.cgi?id=136434">bug 136434</a>
from <span class="vcard"><a class="email" href="mailto:christianw_lehmann@arcor.de" title="Christian Lehmann <christianw_lehmann@arcor.de>"> <span class="fn">Christian Lehmann</span></a>
</span></b>
<pre>(In reply to Mike Kaganski from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=136434#c7">comment #7</a>)
<span class="quote">> (In reply to Christian Lehmann from <a href="show_bug.cgi?id=136434#c6">comment #6</a>)
> > This file weighs 18.8 MB in FODT format, but 1.6 MB
> > when exported into DOCX format. This alone should alert developers about the
> > inflated file size. I have no doubt that the task of correcting a basic
> > design mistake - in this case, obnoxious redundancy in file structure - is
> > deterrent.
>
> Heh, it's not useful to compare apples to oranges. DOCX, as well as ODT, is
> a ZIP with XMLs inside.</span >
Sorry, I was not aware of this. In the present case, the sheer ODT file and the
exported DOCX file have the same size. I remember that the original DOCX file
(the source of the ODT file) was a bit smaller; but this is no longer
verifiable.</pre>
</div>
</p>
<hr>
<span>You are receiving this mail because:</span>
<ul>
<li>You are the assignee for the bug.</li>
</ul>
</body>
</html>