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

Re: [News] Australia Seems Unsure About OOXML, FSFE and Red Hat Slam It

Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Australia stalls OOXML vote as NZ scratches head
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| With the countdown on to the International Organization for Standardization 
>| (ISO) ballot on OOXML, Australia and New Zealand's representatives are 
>| keeping their cards close to their chests on which way they will vote.  
> `----
> 
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/Australia-stalls-OOXML-vote-as-NZ-scratches-head/0,130061733,339286594,00.htm
> 

How could anyone be anything other than implacably opposed to the
creation of a second standard alongside a perfectly good first one?

I'm amazed that Microsoft have managed to corrupt the process so much
that this most fundamental of questions is being ignored.



> Interoperability woes with MS-OOXML
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| The proposed MS-OOXML/DIS29500 specification raises serious technical and 
>| legal concerns. This context briefing highlights three examples of how the 
>| proposed specification and its practical implementation in MS Office 2007 
>| hinders interoperability, fosters vendor dependence and results in market 
>| distortion.    
>| 
>| It does not alleviate concerns that at the ISO Ballot Resolution Meeting for 
>| the proposed specification more than 1,000 technical concerns and proposed 
>| dispositions required discussion. Participants were only able to discuss 
>| between 20 to 30 dispositions and to accept approximately 200 minor editorial 
>| corrections in the allocated time. Around 900 dispositions were not 
>| discussed. 
> `----
> 
> http://fsfeurope.org/documents/msooxml-interoperability
> 
> OOXML: Why the debate?
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| OOXML?despite its complexity?is not currently well-defined enough to be fully 
>| implementable. It would take a great deal of time to resolve all of the 
>| issues that have been identified, and the current ballot resolution process 
>| simply does not provide enough time to fix these issues and create a truly 
>| open standard that all vendors can implement.    
>| 
>| Next week we will look at the ISO certification process and how Red Hat has 
>| been participating in the discussion.  
> `----
> 
> http://www.redhatmagazine.com/2008/03/06/ooxml-why-the-debate/
> 
> 
> Recent:
> 
> Standards Australia denies OOXML bias
> 
> ,----[ Quote ] 
>| Representatives from IBM, Google, Catalyst IT and Waugh Partners expressed 
>| their concern the appointment of Topologi director Rick Jelliffe to the 
>| delegation was not indicative of the wider industry view on OOXML 
>| standardization.   
> `----
> 
> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=1735452258&rid=-50
> 
> 
> The OOXML BRM and Australia: What happens next
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Senior project manager at Standards Australia, Panjan Navaratnam, will head 
>| the delegation and shoulder the responsibility for all Australian positions. 
>| He will be supported in an advisory role by technical expert Rick Jeliffe.  
>| 
>| Despite some concerns surrounding the objectivity of Jeliffe, Standards 
>| Australia insists that its delegates are not participating as an agent of any 
>| personal or organisational viewpoint.   
> `----
> 
> http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php?id=1392366014&rid=-50
> 
> 
> Standards Australia defends Jelliffe he has never developed Microsoft products
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Look at this press release from Standards Australia, it is really funny how 
>| they carefully weight their words: 
>| 
>|     The article also incorrectly describes Rick Jelliffe as a ?Microsoft 
>|     developer?. While Mr Jelliffe consults widely to industry and government 
>|     including Microsoft, he has never developed Microsoft products.  
>| 
>| Let's rewrite it like this to see if it changes something:
>| 
>|     Rick Jelliffe is not a ?Microsoft developer? as such. While Mr Jelliffe 
>|     is being paid for consultancy work by Microsoft, he is not developing 
>|     Microsoft products.  
>| 
>| Where is the money?
> `----
> 
> http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-42872/standards-australia-defends-jelliffe:he-has-never-developed-microsoft-products
> 
> 
> Microsoft developer joins Aussie OOXML standards delegation
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Last year Jelliffe was implicated in editing OOXML Wikipedia entries at the 
>| request of Microsoft. A public explanation is available on Jelliffe's blog. 
> `----
> 
> http://www.computerworld.com.au/index.php/id;445400562;fp;16;fpid;1
> 
> 
> How to Get Your Platform Accepted as a Standard - Microsoft Style
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| In the section of an internal manual on effective evangelism, written in 1997 
>| by James Plamondon, Technical Evangelist, he lays out an elaborate series of 
>| steps to get Microsoft's platforms accepted as de facto standards. Among the 
>| steps lists are working behind the scenes with supposedly independent but 
>| actually pliable and supportive analysts and consultants.    
> `----
> 
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20071023002351958
> 
> 
> Related:
> 
> EU Initiates Investigation Against Microsoft OOXML Push
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| But with Steve Ballmer taking over as CEO, there was supposed to be a kinder, 
>| gentler Microsoft - one that would play nicely with its competitors.  When 
>| antitrust regulators in turn challenged this new Microsoft, it issued not 
>| challenges to fight to the end to prove that it had done nothing illegal, but 
>| statements promising to "cooperate fully."    
>| 
>| But at the same time, Microsoft is still a tough competitor.  As Microsoft's 
>| Director of Corporate Standards Jason Matusow famously warned at his blog 
>| last year:  
>| 
>|     Make no mistake; all parties are looking at the full picture to find 
>|     strategies that will result in the outcome they desire. Provided - of 
>|     course - that they do so within the context of the rules that apply to 
>|     the process, this is exactly what one should expect to happen. It is 
>|     going to be a very interesting next few months.    
>| 
>| Indeed, the months that followed proved to be interesting indeed.  Microsoft 
>| said that some of its employees became over zealous, most flagrantly in 
>| Sweden, where marketing assists were promised to several business partners as 
>| incentives to join the national standards committee and vote for OOXM.   
> `----
> 
> http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080208082501776
> 
> 
> EU Commission Investigating Microsoft's MSOOXML Push
> 
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| I hope they think to investigate the smear campaigns that seem to always 
>| happen to anyone on the other side from Microsoft. What happened to Peter 
>| Quinn was by no means unique.  
> `----
> 
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080208151410252


-- 
| Mark Kent   --   mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk          |
| Cola faq:  http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/   |
| Cola trolls:  http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/                        |
| My (new) blog:  http://www.thereisnomagic.org                        |

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