Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sat 24th Nov 2007 23:31 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 286649
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
News
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/25/13 0:45 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 23:59 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 22:33 UTC
Linked by Howard Fosdick on 05/24/13 21:41 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/24/13 14:44 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 23:22 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:04 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 22:01 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/23/13 17:52 UTC
Linked by Thom Holwerda on 05/22/13 22:23 UTC
More News »
Sponsored Links



Member since:
2005-12-31
>>Well, love it or hate it OOXML is here to stay<<
That is not the problem. The problem is that OOXML is being certified by the ISO as on open standard, and OOXML is absolutely *not* open.
In many places, the OOXML documentation makes statements like: "do this the same as in Office-97" but the office-97 specs are closed. Hence OOXML is *not* open.
Msft is free to churn out whatever proprietary standards they want. And stupid people are free to be vendor-locked by those standards. Just don't lie about OOXML being open, that is all I ask.