Erik Funkenbusch <erik@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On Fri, 19 Jan 2007 23:25:17 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> Open XML: Six thousand pages, one month, no chance...
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>>| Weary of cynicism, I've tried to believe that Microsoft's
>>| approach to international open document standards really does
>>| have the user in mind. I want to believe: there's enough
>>| nonsense to worry about without having to worry about
>>| gratuitously complex, changing, proprietary standards.
>>| If Microsoft agrees, as it says it does, and is genuinely
>>| on the road to taking that worry away, then by gum I'll
>>| be happy never to think about it again.
>>|
>>| [...]
>>|
>>| The answer is to game the system. As part of this, the company
>>| has created (by itself, unlike Open Doc) a proposal for OOXML
>>| that is six thousand pages long, and then put it into the
>>| fast-track approval system with very minimal time for
>>| discussion and objection.
>> `----
>>
>> http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10004805o-2000331777b,00.htm
>
> What I find absolutely hilarious is all the ODF supporters and their
> conspiracy theories about OOXML being 6000 pages on purpose, to make it
> impossible to implement.
>
> All this ignores the fact that when Microsoft submitted OOXML to Ecma it
> was only 1500 pages long, and the ECMA process, pushed by non-microsoft
> ECMA members pushed the standard out to 6000 pages.
>
> Funny nobody seems to remember that.
Because it didnt actually happen that way. You're a liar, eric funkybreath.
-----yttrx
--
http://www.yttrx.net
|
|
