Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Nov 2007 23:31 UTC
Gnome "The GNOME Foundation has issued a statement in response to recent accusations that it has been supporting the acceptance of Microsoft's Office Open XML format as an ECMA standard at the expense of the Open Document Format, the open standard used by OpenOffice.org, KOffice and other free software office applications. However, whether the statement's attempt at logical rebuttal will do anything to reduce the emotions or altruism behind the criticisms is anybody's guess."
Thread beginning with comment 286562
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: ...
by aseigo on Sun 25th Nov 2007 01:11 UTC in reply to "..."
aseigo
Member since:
2005-07-06

yes, there is a very real difference between implementing a spec and being a part of the standardization process.

sadly, Jody will likely only be a bystander in that process anyways as it is doubtful Microsoft will allow meaningful involvement beyond what helps their own self interests (e.g. allowing just enough input to be able to point and say "hey, see, others are involved too, just like a real standard!").

i understand why Jody and the GNOME Foundation are doing what they are doing, however i also think it's a bit on the naive side of hopefulness and certainly sends the wrong message to the world.

one can certainly implement standards without being involved in their creation. sometimes that's precisely what one needs to do.

when looking for cues as to when to do that, it may be useful to look at what your friends, allies and trusted colleagues are doing.

Reply Parent Score: 20

RE[2]: ...
by jdub on Mon 26th Nov 2007 12:32 in reply to "RE: ..."
jdub Member since:
2005-08-19

Aaron, we were not involved in OOXML's creation, nor are we contributing to it becoming an ISO standard. Microsoft dumped the spec on ECMA, Jody has been pushing them hard to release relevant documentation for as much of it as he can.

That has actually been of material benefit to the fight against OOXML in ISO, given that Jody has blown out the OOXML specification size pretty well. :-)

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[3]: ...
by segedunum on Mon 26th Nov 2007 19:30 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

That has actually been of material benefit to the fight against OOXML in ISO, given that Jody has blown out the OOXML specification size pretty well. :-)

What OOXML specification?

It doesn't matter what the published spec is. The only defacto standard that matters is Microsoft's implementation, and it's already out there. That implementation can, and probably will, change as and when Microsoft sees fit with no regard whatsoever to the published specification.

What is Jody going to be using as his test suite for OOXML? If it's Office 2007, I rest my case.

Anyone who cannot see that is an idiot.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[3]: ...
by aseigo on Tue 27th Nov 2007 00:02 in reply to "RE[2]: ..."
aseigo Member since:
2005-07-06

hey jeff =)

"we were not involved in OOXML's creation,"

the whole point of Jody being involved with the ECMA group is to help have a say in OOXML isn't it? that's pretty much "involved in OOXML's creation". perhaps the word "creation" is incorrect; let me replace that with the word "development".

"nor are we contributing to it becoming an ISO standard"

that's merely an unintended side effect of this. i certainly don't believe it is the intention, however. it sucks when intention and results don't match up, i know. =/

p.s. see you at l.c.a in january =))

Reply Parent Score: 2