Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: [News] Early Signs of Disorder in Stacked-deck OOXML BRM

In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz
<newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
 wrote
on Thu, 07 Feb 2008 00:44:00 +0000
<4102639.y6Gr2TAu6h@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
> Dissing OOXML
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Rather remarkably for a 6000-page specification, OOXML is on a fast track, 
> | but it has come into collision with over 3000 comments on that specification, 
> | many of them negative. The question is, how on earth can the national bodies 
> | (NB) who do the prodding, poking and voting, work their way through those 
> | comments to pick out the really key ones, and make sure that they get sorted 
> | before approval is contemplated?     
> `----
>
> http://www.computerworlduk.com/toolbox/open-source/blogs/index.cfm?entryid=464

Easy.  Microsoft populates the review board with half of
their own guys, and push it through the process. ;-)

>
> The whole meeting seems like a farce. Microsoft has
> corrupted the process, but who will sue the company
> for doing this?

The only ones who can sue are those who are directly
affected.  See in particular _Lujan v. Defenders of
Wildlife_, 504 U.S. 555, decided in 1992.

Presumably, those bringing suit would have to show that
they are directly affected by the approval of OOXML.
I could see some developers making a fuss over it, though.

>
>
> Related:
>
> More Irregularities in the OOXML ISO Process Surface
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | If you read about what happened there in that article, "OOXML in Norway: The 
> | haywire process," your jaw will simply drop. I do think there is something 
> | the matter with the ISO process if this is how it works.  
> `----
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070827111019189

Ah, politics. ;-)  There is some good news in this article; if Microsoft
is forced to divulge technical specifications for its older formats it
would benefit both the specification and competitors.

But this looks like it's getting rather messy....

[rest snipped]

-- 
#191, ewill3@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #40490127:
for(;;) ;

-- 
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index