How open is "open" when Microsoft say it?
,----[ Quote ]
| Microsoft put forth the argument that OOXML is sufficiently different: ODF is
| constrained because it needs enhancements to support the detris accumulated
| over the differing versions of Microsoft Office's evolution - yet OOXML will
| also need to cater for this. It seems a hollow argument to say an entirely
| new open specification is required. Given ODF exists, and that PDF is already
| a de-facto standard for electronic document exchange, one really must
| question the significance of Ecma-approval and the genuineness of the
| word "open" in Microsoft's parlance.
`----
http://www.itwire.com.au/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=13391&Itemid=1054
Related:
Microsoft: No plans to support ODF, despite supporting ANSI accreditation
,----[ Quote ]
| As the friction between ODF and OXML continues to bubble, Nick
| McGrath, Microsoft's director of platform strategy, has gone on
| record dismissing ODF as a potential solution for Microsoft, even
| as the company backs ODF for ANSI accreditation.
`----
http://arstechnica.com/journals/microsoft.ars/2007/05/18/microsoft-no-plans-to-support-odf-despite-backing-the-standard-for-ansi-accreditation
OOXML workshop with Microsoft and Czech standardisation institute
,----[ Quote ]
| Can you imagine better way to spend 4 hours of your Friday afternoon
| time than discussing OOXML problems with non-techies from Microsoft?
|
| [...]
|
| I have read approx. 200 pages of the specification and I decided to stop,
| because it is dangerous. The ideas presented in various parts of the
| specification (like two ways to represent the date - one of them
| representing dates between 1900 and 20000 and another one to represent
| dates between 1904 and 20000 where the second one is a complete subset of
| the first one!) are dangerous to the mental health of the reader. The
| innovative method of storing the language code (e.g. the decimal integer
| 58380 into two digit hexadecimal number) is also worth a world-wide
| patent...
|
| I simply can't believe that developers and or TC45 members from Apple,
| Barclays Capital, BP, The British Library, Essilor, Intel, Microsoft,
| NextPage, Novell, Statoil, Toshiba, and the United States Library of
| Congress actually read the final document. I can't believe it. If I ever
| write such document, I surely won't sign it by my name. Why?
`----
http://blog.janik.cz/archives/2007/05/19/T20_32_07/
|
|
