Talk:Open Office

Can we have a citation for usage of "Open Office" in reference to "Office Open XML"? I have never seen such usage in the wild. In reference to OOXML, I have only seen (mistaken) uses of "Open Office XML". So it seems to me that if this battle is to be fought, it would be at Open Office XML, not here. —Fleminra 20:36, 16 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Why would you see it as a battle. This page is fully neutral. On the open XML page the distiguish tag could actually lead people away from the correct article to the wrong article because your examples showed that by media mistakenly using Open Office XML in stead of Office Open XML that people using Open Office XML on wikipedie nearly always need to be at the Office Open XML page and the distinguish tag there now confusingly suggests they might look for another page. For use here, if people in media article confusingly use Open Office XML when meaning Office Open XML (as you have given already the examples for) then it is likely that people lazily use a shortened version on wikipedia while intenting to reach the ooxml article. hAl 13:18, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Find an example of someone using the term "Open Office" (not "Open Office XML") in reference to "Office Open XML," and you'll have justified your change. Your frequently articulated fear that Wikipedia readers are zombies who will blindly follow any distinguish tags they encounter gives them no credit.  Clearly they can read the first paragraphs of any of these articles and have a pretty good handle on all these terms.  Even before your change, if someone typed in "Open Office", the article they landed on linked to OOXML even before the first paragraph.  I'm calling this a "battle" because I anticipate yet another long, boring discussion, with clearly drawn battle lines, about a stupid little detail like this article.  "Open Office" means "OpenOffice.org."  Neither Microsoft nor Ecma will tell you otherwise.  —Fleminra 18:45, 17 October 2007 (UTC)


 * You already provided examples before that people confuse the terminologie. Open Office is just a shortening of search terms of Open Office XML which you already clearly showed the media to be to be meaning Office Open XML. Also the combination of open office is often used in general talk about open office format or standard solutions. Like here on a page about OOXML: http://www.openxml.biz/index.html or here in a zd article http://news.zdnet.co.uk/software/0,1000000121,39287024,00.htm hAl 08:19, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * I have provided no examples of the use of "Open Office" (this phrase, in isolation, without "XML" after it) to refer to "Office Open XML". I have provided examples of people mistakenly using the phrase "Open Office XML" when they're talking about "Office Open XML".  That's why I'm saying this battle belongs at Open Office XML.  In the references you gave, they're not using "Open Office", the proper noun. They're using "open office" as a pair of modifiers (specifically, an adjective and a noun adjunct); and they are not using "open office" as a stand-in phrase with OOXML specifically as the understood antecedent.  So essentially what you're advocating is that every pair of adjectives should have a Wikipedia article listing the things that can be described by those adjectives.  Is that right?  E.g., an article called "Portable Network" that disambiguates between Portable Network Graphics and BMP file format?  How about an article at office open, grammatically equivalent to open office, for the same purpose?  —Fleminra 19:58, 18 October 2007 (UTC)


 * Are we done here? Are you going to revert when I change this back to a redirect?  —Fleminra 19:28, 23 October 2007 (UTC)


 * What's with the silent treatment, Hal? How has your search for "'Open Office' meaning 'Office Open XML'" been going?  So when someone says "Open Office XML", you're saying that the "Open Office" part really means "Office Open XML", so the full translation is "Office Open XML XML"?  There is an article (a redirect) at Open Office XML.  Take this fight there until you find a reference to back-up your version of this article.  BTW, I'm not impressed by your discourteous, unexplained removal of the "merge" tag.  —Fleminra 01:30, 24 October 2007 (UTC)


 * If you break down the name Office Open XML (see sentence diagram), you have a noun adjunct ("Office"), an adjective ("Open"), and the noun ("XML") &mdash; as I mentioned before. In English, if you have two modifiers like this, and one of them is a adjective, and one is a noun adjunct, normally the adjective comes first and the noun adjunct comes second.  "Office Open XML" sounds unnatural, and is often screwed up (as we've shown), because it does not seem to follow this rule.  However, based on Rick Jelliffe's recent comment (Talk:Office Open XML), the name makes sense because "Office" is really a modifier of "Open XML" &mdash; "Office" is not a modifier of "XML".  If mathematical parentheses can be abused to illustrate grouping, it's really "Office (Open XML)".  So by referencing "Office Open XML" in this "Open Office" article, on the premise that "Open Office" is equivalent to "Office Open" w.r.t. OOXML, you're really breaking the associativity.  I.e., you're saying that "Open Office" == "Office (Open"... note mismatched parenthesis.  —Fleminra 02:49, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Use as a mistake for OOXML is very rare and statistically insignificant.
Microsoft probably have deliberately used "office" and "open" in that way to make it confusing especially given the stringent rules that Microsoft legal have for their own product naming. Right now though if you google for Open Office then the first of many pages is for obviously Openoffice.org related hits. The use as a disambiguation for OOXML is statistically insignificant. It thus represents a minor view i.e. WP:FRINGE. Ttiotsw 15:43, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

Redirect to OpenOffice.org
Looking at the history of this page, I see no merit in the attempt to justify alternative uses of the term Open Office. There is no ambiguity with Office Open XML, nor there is with open plan office. Simosx 15:38, 13 November 2007 (UTC)