Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> The Battle for ODF Interoperability
>
> ,----[ Quote ]
> | Last year, when I was socializing the idea of creating the OASIS ODF
> | Interoperability and Conformance TC, I gave a presentation I called "ODF
> | Interoperability: The Price of Success". The observation was that
> | standards that fail never need to deal with interoperability. The
> | creation of test suites, convening of multi-vendor interoperability
> | workshops and plugfests is a sign of a successful standard, one which is
> | implemented by many vendors, one which is adopted by many users, one
> | which has vendor-neutral venues for testing implementations and
> | iteratively refining the standard itself.
> |
> | [...]
> |
> | The pretty words have been shown to be hollow words. Microsoft has not
> enabled choice. Their implementation is not robust. They have, in effect,
> | taken your ODF document, written by you by your choice in an
> | interoperable format, with demonstrated interoperability among several
> | implementations, and corrupted it, without your knowledge or consent.
> `----
>
> http://www.robweir.com/blog/2009/05/battle-for-odf-interoperability.html
Micoshaft is never going to win this one. There will be more ODF developers,
more ODF products and more ODF compatibility than micoshaft can ever hope
to subvert.
All we are lacking is a micoshaft kill switch to block them out
for the sake of protecting ODF users.
Just like proprietory software kill switch or a mono kill switch.
The micoshaft kill switch can be used to market better compatible
and compliant products by those who support ODF better.
|
|
