__/ [ High Plains Thumper ] on Saturday 20 January 2007 09:50 \__
> Mark Kent wrote:
>> High Plains Thumper espoused:
>>
>>> There are issues with OOXML, with compatibility with
>>> standards and inclusion of proprietary formats making it
>>> vendors specific.
>>>
>>> Perhaps the best explanation is summarised in:
>>>
>>> http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?sto
>>> ry=20070117145745854
>>>
>>> or http://tinyurl.com/2pkatq
>>
>> For reference, the average ITU standard is probably in the
>> < 100 pages region, so a standard which is 1500 pages long
>> is extraordinarily long from where I'm sitting. Erik's
>> statement that it's *only* 1500 pages is one of the
>> funniest things I've seen in years.
>
> What it tells me is that the standard is too unwieldy, will be
> difficult to implement. Somehow me thinks that most of it is
> encumbered with legaleese.
>
> A number of municipalities and countries have already selected
> open standards, to avoid vendor lock-in. This will have a
> tempering effect. Perhaps we may see the only country to use
> OOXML as US.
The number of countries and organisation that have chosen ODF is breathtaking
(and growing by the day). Have a look at the OpenDocument Alliance Web site.
Frantic acts to retain the 'monopoly enabler' are indication of what's
happening. Even BECTA, which sleeps in the same bed as Microsft, has found
OOXML unacceptable.
--
~~ Best wishes
Beware the Windows box spewage (more commonly known as "spam")
http://Schestowitz.com | GNU is Not UNIX | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
roy pts/2 Sat Jan 20 00:21 - 00:21 (00:00)
http://iuron.com - proposing a non-profit search engine
|
|
