* [H]omer peremptorily fired off this memo:
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | Alex Brown, Updegrove reports, allowed non P countries to vote,
>> | but OOXML still couldn't get a majority of the delegations to back
>> | it at the BRM. Nor is it clear that allowing non P countries to vote
>> | is even legitimate.
> [...]
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080229124919217
>
> Microsoft needs to give up ... now. It's just getting embarrassing.
> Their desperation is as palpable as their motives.
Nah, not if they're still thinking long-term:
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080229055319727
The better conclusion is that despite the good faith efforts of all
concerned and their willingness to see this process through to its
conclusion, it has proven to be impossible for as large and poorly
prepared a specification as this to be properly addressed via the
"Fast Track" process.
So their ram-rodding failed, and Microsoft can coast for a few
months/years more on their de facto Office monopoly.
And, who knows? Maybe they'll use the time to bring Office 2007+ and
OOXML into accord.
But, in the meantime, we can keep alert:
It is very unfortunate that they were put to this predictably
unsuccessful result through the self-interest of a single vendor
taking advantage of a permissive process that was never intended to
be abused in this fashion.
--
The best way to prepare [to be a programmer] is to write programs, and to
study great programs that other people have written. In my case, I went to
the garbage cans at the Computer Science Center and fished out listings of
their operating system.
-- Bill Gates
|
|
