On Tue, 24 Jul 2007 12:46:40 +0100, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> Game over for OpenDocument?
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| What's next for enterprise users who really want document interoperability?
> `----
>
> http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2007/072307-opendocuments-grounded.html?fsrc=rss-linux-news
>
> F**k. Maybe it's just drama. Probably. Hopefully.
This is particularly interesting from that article:
"And from a legal standpoint, laws around the world effectively mandate
100% fidelity in migrating binary documents to XML. See e.g., E-SIGN Act,
15 U.S.C. 7001(d)(1)(B) : (electronically preserved records must
"accurately reflect[] the information set forth in the contract or other
record" and be "in a form that is capable of being accurately reproduced
for later reference, whether by transmission, printing, or otherwise");
Sarbanes-Oxley Act, 15 U.S.C. 7261(b) (financial information must "not
contain an untrue statement of a material fact"). In fact, it is rare to
find a records retention law that does not require stored records be
accurately preserved."
I believe i've mentioned this several times before and was laughed at and
told this was FUD, that 100% fidelity wasn't important.
This also supports things i've said, and been told i was wrong about,
specifically the part about Sun controlling the ODF development process:
"The da Vinci plug-in could be released within a few weeks if the only goal
was to add virtually perfect native ODF support to MS Word. But that is
insufficient to establish interoperability with other ODF applications such
as OpenOffice.org. That is because Sun Microsystems, which absolutely
controls the OpenDocument standard development process, has programmed
OpenOffice.org to destroy all but two of what section 1.5 of the ODF
specification refers to as "foreign elements and attributes" and is busily
making sure that the new RDF metadata features in ODF v. 1.2 will not be
dependable for interoperability purposes. See, for example, this thread on
the ODF Metadata Subcommittee mailing list."
This wasn't written by a MS Shill. It was co-written by Marbux of Groklaw
fame. Personally, I don't agree with most of his conclusions, but you
can't argue that he doesn't know much about ODF or the process, since he's
on the OASIS committee.
If it's not clear by now that the "offer" for Microsoft to participate in
the ODF standard wasn't genuine, then you need to wake up. ODF was
designed, from the get go, as a weapon to attack Microsoft, and they're
busy using it as such. Microsoft was not welcome, nor would they be
allowed to contribute to ODF in any way. The community has been taken for
a ride by IBM and Sun on this.
|
|
