User: jpmcc Date: 2008-05-23 18:00:12+0000 Modified: marketing/www/planet/atom.xml marketing/www/planet/index.html marketing/www/planet/opml.xml marketing/www/planet/rss10.xml marketing/www/planet/rss20.xml
Log: Planet run at Fri May 23 19:00:14 BST 2008 File Changes: Directory: /marketing/www/planet/ ================================= File [changed]: atom.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/atom.xml?r1=1.479&r2=1.480 Delta lines: +43 -23 --------------------- --- atom.xml 2008-05-23 12:00:04+0000 1.479 +++ atom.xml 2008-05-23 18:00:08+0000 1.480 @@ -5,10 +5,48 @@ <link rel="self" href="http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml"/> <link href="http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/"/> <id>http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml</id> - <updated>2008-05-23T12:00:21+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:24+00:00</updated> <generator uri="http://www.planetplanet.org/";>Planet/2.0 +http://www.planetplanet.org</generator> <entry xml:lang="en"> + <title type="html">How to urinate on a violin</title> + <link href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/"/> + <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/</id> + <updated>2008-05-23T15:50:20+00:00</updated> + <content type="html"><p>The story of OOXML and in general the story of proprietary formats and protocols being used and promoted to control the market and the access of citizens to digital re <span lang="en-US">sources is a long but fascinating one. The three (yes, three) last episodes of the OOXML story are a good example of that.</span> +<p lang="en-US">Ever since Wednesday night, three important news were announced. Let me comment each of them as briefly as I can.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<ul> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft will not support the ISO standard sometimes referred to as OOXML in its current set of office solutions, Microsoft Office 2007 and 2008 (for Macs). The formats used by Microsoft are also called OOXML, but they are not the same as the ISO/IEC 26300 standard. Confusing? Hmm, yes. That one, about which we know very few besides that the ITTF refuses to share it with the world, will be implemented by MS Office 14, the next version Office around 2010 or 2011.</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>And me who thinks there were hundreds of OOXML implementations? Where are they? Gone, gone, gone, with the wind, just like the Old South of Scarlet O&#8217;Hara, a fantasy of past times, which OOXML today turns out to be.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">I willingly put the news item on the lack of support of OOXML by Microsoft Office 2007 first, because I get the feeling that these are the most important news here. But if you</span> <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx"><span lang="en-US">check the source</span></a> <span lang="en-US">, you will also see the other very important news item: Microsoft will integrate the native support of ODF in Microsoft Office 2007. This calls for several comments. First, what Microsoft will do exactly is left to be seen. We are told that the ODF support will come with the Office 2007 Service Pack 2 that will be released in 2009. That&#8217;s a long time before the market can benefit from ODF in Microsoft products. Perhaps more disturbingly, Microsoft announces the support for ODF 1.1. I understand that&#8217;s the majority of the ODF documents out there, and I would understand this as being a very pragmatic choice if its support was not scheduled in 2009, that is, months and months after ODF 1.2 will be released (at least as definite specification). That is something I have trouble understanding. The second question I have is what kind of native support we&#8217;re talking about. I am inclined to think that we might have an actual quality support of ODF in Microsoft Office, but integrating a converter such as the existing ones or providing lousy support -on purpose- will not do the job. The market wants real, native, effective support of ODF (real-world version) in MS Office as soon as possible and with no strings attached. All things considered, I do however genuinely applaud Microsoft&#8217;s move and find it useful and welcome</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>provided that no games are played and transparency and openness are respected.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft is also announcing its participation to the OASIS ODF Technical Committee. One less well contemplated element in this news is that Microsoft announces that their OSP (Open Specification Promise) will cover ODF. I don&#8217;t know what to think about it at this stage, so my opinion will be transitional (no pun intended here). I am not sure how useful this is, as the OSP</span> <a href="http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted"><span lang="en-US">conveys no rights</span></a> <span lang="en-US">and is notably unsafe for Free Software implementations, dixit the Software Freedom Law Center. In short, I don&#8217;t like that announcement about the OSP. It smells bad, or at the very least dubious. In the same train of thoughts, I believe the OASIS should be wary of what Microsoft really wants to do inside the ODF TC. But here again, I am applauding the move by Microsoft, although I suspect them of having ulterior motives.</span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Last but not least, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS)</span> <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/05/the-south-afric.html"><span lang="en-US">has filed an appeal to the ISO/IEC today against OOXML</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. This is an important decision. I believe that the whole OOXML standardization process has turned into a farce, and many think the same. Perhaps the ISO will deem this appeal receivable, unless their strange world-logic will make them feel offended by this request. In short, the latest announcements should not all of a sudden redeem Microsoft for what they did to the standardization, the industry, and the citizens at large. The software vendor has actually managed to destroy trust of many people, including the European Commission, who now wants</span> <a href="http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/news/2217375/ec-investigate-microsoft-odf"><span lang="en-US">to check how well Microsoft will play with ODF</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. Old world&#8217;s paranoïa? No. But somebody&#8217;s got to do something about it, somehow.</span></li> +</ul> +<p lang="en-US">The points above call for some closing comments. How will this affect the industry? It is too early to tell, and besides, these are just announcements. We will see what kind of beef will be served later on. On the front of open standards, this could be a moderate success. If Microsoft walks the line, we will see an expansion of interoperability across the industry, the users and the vendors; but we&#8217;re still waiting for Microsoft Office to use ODF by default.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p> <span lang="en-US">In the end, this will have been a tremendous waste of time. I&#8217;m sure that Microsoft will try to gain some advantage from OOXML, as broken as it is. They could try to reproduce what they managed to do with .NET and CLR by standardizing and opening only a subset of the .Net API , thus letting Novell create a very limited .Net implementation, Mono. Regardless of what the future options could be, the OOXML standardization will prove to be the single most destructive episode of the standardization history. No other standard will have been paid so dearly to achieve so few, while in the real world, the unspecified file format called OOXML and used by Microsoft Office 2007 will continue to lock in generations of users; <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9949736-16.html">Sharepoint will not stop using OOXML,</a> as Matt Asay points out. All this, to put it to rest, begs one and final comment, led to nothing more than what we had start off with: a real open standard (ODF), a proprietary format, and the vague premise of an ISO standard. Urinating on a violin would not have taken us any further.</span> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p><br clear="left" /></p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=69&akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_69" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></p></p></content> + <author> + <name>Charles Schulz</name> + <uri>http://standardsandfreedom.net</uri> + </author> + <source> + <title type="html">Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings</title> + <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> + <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> + <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:16+00:00</updated> + </source> + </entry> + + <entry xml:lang="en"> <title type="html">OpenOffice.org Extensions: Sun Presenter Screen</title> <link href="http://www.solidoffice.com/archives/808"/> <id>http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=808</id> @@ -128,7 +166,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">The Magic of Open Source</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://www.theopensourcerer.com/tag/openofficeorg/feed"/> <id>http://www.theopensourcerer.com/tag/openofficeorg/feed</id> - <updated>2008-05-22T00:00:22+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:24+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -166,7 +204,7 @@ <title type="html">jpmcc's shared items in Google Reader</title> <link rel="self" href="http://www.google.co.uk/reader/public/atom/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast"/> <id>tag:google.com,2005:reader/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast</id> - <updated>2008-05-23T12:00:17+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:19+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -398,7 +436,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-05-21T12:00:16+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:16+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -484,25 +522,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-05-21T12:00:16+00:00</updated> - </source> - </entry> - - <entry> - <title type="html">A New User Experience Team Logo</title> - <link href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/a_new_user_experience_team"/> - <id>tag:google.com,2005:reader/item/5625bf3611dabd43</id> - <updated>2008-05-09T06:33:08+00:00</updated> - <content type="html"><p> <img vspace="0" hspace="0" border="0" align="bottom" alt="New UX Logo" src="http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png" /></p><p> </p><p><font size="3">I'm happy to announce the new logo of the User Experience Team.<br />The main goal of the logo is to penetrate core values of the project:<br /><br /></font></p><ul><li><font size="3">Usability,</font></li><li><font size="3">Productivity,</font></li><li><font size="3">Enjoyment<br /></font></li></ul><font size="3"><br />The three terms summarize in a very short manner what the User<br />Experience Team's overall goals are. The list below describes the<br />meaning a little bit more in detail:<br /><br /><b>Usability:</b><br />This term explains the ease with which people can work with<br />OpenOffice.org to archive their goal in a particular context in an<br />effective and efficient manner. Sadly, this term is usually meant to<br />describe the âuser friendlinessâ in the field of computer-human<br />interaction.<br /><br /><b>Productivity:</b><br />This term accompanies âusabilityâ because of the general<br />misunderstanding of meaning âuser friendlinessâ only. Again, it<br />emphasizes that working with OpenOffice.org should raise the<br />âproductivityâ significantly.<br /><br /><b>Enjoyment:</b><br />Working with OpenOffice.org should be pleasant. This is important, if<br />OpenOffice.org wants to attract new users and keep the experienced ones.<br />Currently, OpenOffice.org loses many potential users who dislike the<br />overall behavior/look of OpenOffice.org. But there is also a serious<br />fact: people which are happy with a product tend to be more creative in<br />their solution findings.<br /><br />The logo is the first step to improve the external communication of the<br />User Experience project. If you want to know more, then please have a<br />look at:<br /><a href="http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication">http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication</a><br /><br /><br />As always feedback and comments are highly appreciated.<br /><br />Christian</font></content> - <author> - <name>Christian Jansen</name> - <uri></uri> - </author> - <source> - <title type="html">jpmcc's shared items in Google Reader</title> - <link rel="self" href="http://www.google.co.uk/reader/public/atom/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast"/> - <id>tag:google.com,2005:reader/user/06203502505240591501/state/com.google/broadcast</id> - <updated>2008-05-23T12:00:17+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-05-23T18:00:16+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> File [changed]: index.html Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/index.html?r1=1.479&r2=1.480 Delta lines: +34 -15 --------------------- --- index.html 2008-05-23 12:00:05+0000 1.479 +++ index.html 2008-05-23 18:00:09+0000 1.480 @@ -34,10 +34,43 @@ <a href="rss20.xml"><img src="rss2.gif" alt="Link to RSS 2 feed" /></a> </div> -<p><em>Bloggings on marketing topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: May 23, 2008 12:00 PM GMT</em></p> +<p><em>Bloggings on marketing topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: May 23, 2008 06:00 PM GMT</em></p> <h2>May 23, 2008</h2> <h3> +<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net"; title="Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings"> +Charles Schulz</a> : +<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/";> +How to urinate on a violin</a> +</h3> +<p> +<p>The story of OOXML and in general the story of proprietary formats and protocols being used and promoted to control the market and the access of citizens to digital re <span lang="en-US">sources is a long but fascinating one. The three (yes, three) last episodes of the OOXML story are a good example of that.</span> +<p lang="en-US">Ever since Wednesday night, three important news were announced. Let me comment each of them as briefly as I can.</p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<ul> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft will not support the ISO standard sometimes referred to as OOXML in its current set of office solutions, Microsoft Office 2007 and 2008 (for Macs). The formats used by Microsoft are also called OOXML, but they are not the same as the ISO/IEC 26300 standard. Confusing? Hmm, yes. That one, about which we know very few besides that the ITTF refuses to share it with the world, will be implemented by MS Office 14, the next version Office around 2010 or 2011.</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>And me who thinks there were hundreds of OOXML implementations? Where are they? Gone, gone, gone, with the wind, just like the Old South of Scarlet O’Hara, a fantasy of past times, which OOXML today turns out to be.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">I willingly put the news item on the lack of support of OOXML by Microsoft Office 2007 first, because I get the feeling that these are the most important news here. But if you</span> <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx";><span lang="en-US">check the source</span></a> <span lang="en-US">, you will also see the other very important news item: Microsoft will integrate the native support of ODF in Microsoft Office 2007. This calls for several comments. First, what Microsoft will do exactly is left to be seen. We are told that the ODF support will come with the Office 2007 Service Pack 2 that will be released in 2009. That’s a long time before the market can benefit from ODF in Microsoft products. Perhaps more disturbingly, Microsoft announces the support for ODF 1.1. I understand that’s the majority of the ODF documents out there, and I would understand this as being a very pragmatic choice if its support was not scheduled in 2009, that is, months and months after ODF 1.2 will be released (at least as definite specification). That is something I have trouble understanding. The second question I have is what kind of native support we’re talking about. I am inclined to think that we might have an actual quality support of ODF in Microsoft Office, but integrating a converter such as the existing ones or providing lousy support -on purpose- will not do the job. The market wants real, native, effective support of ODF (real-world version) in MS Office as soon as possible and with no strings attached. All things considered, I do however genuinely applaud Microsoft’s move and find it useful and welcome</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>provided that no games are played and transparency and openness are respected.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft is also announcing its participation to the OASIS ODF Technical Committee. One less well contemplated element in this news is that Microsoft announces that their OSP (Open Specification Promise) will cover ODF. I don’t know what to think about it at this stage, so my opinion will be transitional (no pun intended here). I am not sure how useful this is, as the OSP</span> <a href="http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted";><span lang="en-US">conveys no rights</span></a> <span lang="en-US">and is notably unsafe for Free Software implementations, dixit the Software Freedom Law Center. In short, I don’t like that announcement about the OSP. It smells bad, or at the very least dubious. In the same train of thoughts, I believe the OASIS should be wary of what Microsoft really wants to do inside the ODF TC. But here again, I am applauding the move by Microsoft, although I suspect them of having ulterior motives.</span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Last but not least, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS)</span> <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/05/the-south-afric.html";><span lang="en-US">has filed an appeal to the ISO/IEC today against OOXML</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. This is an important decision. I believe that the whole OOXML standardization process has turned into a farce, and many think the same. Perhaps the ISO will deem this appeal receivable, unless their strange world-logic will make them feel offended by this request. In short, the latest announcements should not all of a sudden redeem Microsoft for what they did to the standardization, the industry, and the citizens at large. The software vendor has actually managed to destroy trust of many people, including the European Commission, who now wants</span> <a href="http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/news/2217375/ec-investigate-microsoft-odf";><span lang="en-US">to check how well Microsoft will play with ODF</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. Old world’s paranoïa? No. But somebody’s got to do something about it, somehow.</span></li> +</ul> +<p lang="en-US">The points above call for some closing comments. How will this affect the industry? It is too early to tell, and besides, these are just announcements. We will see what kind of beef will be served later on. On the front of open standards, this could be a moderate success. If Microsoft walks the line, we will see an expansion of interoperability across the industry, the users and the vendors; but we’re still waiting for Microsoft Office to use ODF by default.</p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p> <span lang="en-US">In the end, this will have been a tremendous waste of time. I’m sure that Microsoft will try to gain some advantage from OOXML, as broken as it is. They could try to reproduce what they managed to do with .NET and CLR by standardizing and opening only a subset of the .Net API , thus letting Novell create a very limited .Net implementation, Mono. Regardless of what the future options could be, the OOXML standardization will prove to be the single most destructive episode of the standardization history. No other standard will have been paid so dearly to achieve so few, while in the real world, the unspecified file format called OOXML and used by Microsoft Office 2007 will continue to lock in generations of users; <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9949736-16.html";>Sharepoint will not stop using OOXML,</a> as Matt Asay points out. All this, to put it to rest, begs one and final comment, led to nothing more than what we had start off with: a real open standard (ODF), a proprietary format, and the vague premise of an ISO standard. Urinating on a violin would not have taken us any further.</span> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p lang="en-US"> </p> +<p><br clear="left" /></p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=69&akst_action=share-this"; title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_69" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></p></p></p> +<p> +<em><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/";>by Charles at May 23, 2008 03:50 PM GMT</a></em> +</p> +<br /> +<hr /> +<br /> +<h3> <a href="http://www.solidoffice.com"; title="SolidOffice » OpenOffice.org"> Benjamin Horst</a> : <a href="http://www.solidoffice.com/archives/808";> @@ -425,20 +458,6 @@ <br /> <hr /> <br /> -<h3> -<a href="" title="jpmcc's shared items in Google Reader"> -GullFOSS</a> : -<a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/a_new_user_experience_team";> -A New User Experience Team Logo</a> -</h3> -<p> -<p> <img vspace="0" hspace="0" border="0" align="bottom" alt="New UX Logo" src="http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png"; /></p><p> </p><p><font size="3">I'm happy to announce the new logo of the User Experience Team.<br />The main goal of the logo is to penetrate core values of the project:<br /><br /></font></p><ul><li><font size="3">Usability,</font></li><li><font size="3">Productivity,</font></li><li><font size="3">Enjoyment<br /></font></li></ul><font size="3"><br />The three terms summarize in a very short manner what the User<br />Experience Team's overall goals are. The list below describes the<br />meaning a little bit more in detail:<br /><br /><b>Usability:</b><br />This term explains the ease with which people can work with<br />OpenOffice.org to archive their goal in a particular context in an<br />effective and efficient manner. Sadly, this term is usually meant to<br />describe the âuser friendlinessâ in the field of computer-human<br />interaction.<br /><br /><b>Productivity:</b><br />This term accompanies âusabilityâ because of the general<br />misunderstanding of meaning âuser friendlinessâ only. Again, it<br />emphasizes that working with OpenOffice.org should raise the<br />âproductivityâ significantly.<br /><br /><b>Enjoyment:</b><br />Working with OpenOffice.org should be pleasant. This is important, if<br />OpenOffice.org wants to attract new users and keep the experienced ones.<br />Currently, OpenOffice.org loses many potential users who dislike the<br />overall behavior/look of OpenOffice.org. But there is also a serious<br />fact: people which are happy with a product tend to be more creative in<br />their solution findings.<br /><br />The logo is the first step to improve the external communication of the<br />User Experience project. If you want to know more, then please have a<br />look at:<br /><a href="http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication";>http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication</a><br /><br /><br />As always feedback and comments are highly appreciated.<br /><br />Christian</font></p> -<p> -<em><a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/a_new_user_experience_team";>by Christian Jansen at May 09, 2008 06:33 AM GMT</a></em> -</p> -<br /> -<hr /> -<br /> <a id="disclaimer" name="disclaimer"></a> <p><em>Disclaimer: all views expressed on this page are those of the individual contributors, and may not reflect the views of the File [changed]: opml.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/opml.xml?r1=1.479&r2=1.480 Delta lines: +1 -1 ------------------- --- opml.xml 2008-05-23 12:00:05+0000 1.479 +++ opml.xml 2008-05-23 18:00:09+0000 1.480 @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ <opml version="1.1"> <head> <title>Marketing Planet</title> - <dateModified>Fri, 23 May 2008 12:00:21 +0000</dateModified> + <dateModified>Fri, 23 May 2008 18:00:24 +0000</dateModified> <ownerName>Marketing Project</ownerName> <ownerEmail>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</ownerEmail> </head> File [changed]: rss10.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/rss10.xml?r1=1.274&r2=1.275 Delta lines: +26 -8 -------------------- --- rss10.xml 2008-05-23 12:00:05+0000 1.274 +++ rss10.xml 2008-05-23 18:00:09+0000 1.275 @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ <items> <rdf:Seq> + <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=808"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=807"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://blogs.sun.com/dancer/entry/huge_success_for_the_odf"; /> @@ -32,11 +33,35 @@ <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=799"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-5198340507565233169.post-999217676869903400" /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/09/openofficeorg-30-beta-creativity-extended/"; /> - <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:google.com,2005:reader/item/5625bf3611dabd43" /> </rdf:Seq> </items> </channel> +<item rdf:about="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/";> + <title>Charles Schulz: How to urinate on a violin</title> + <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/</link> + <content:encoded><p>The story of OOXML and in general the story of proprietary formats and protocols being used and promoted to control the market and the access of citizens to digital re <span lang="en-US">sources is a long but fascinating one. The three (yes, three) last episodes of the OOXML story are a good example of that.</span> +<p lang="en-US">Ever since Wednesday night, three important news were announced. Let me comment each of them as briefly as I can.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<ul> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft will not support the ISO standard sometimes referred to as OOXML in its current set of office solutions, Microsoft Office 2007 and 2008 (for Macs). The formats used by Microsoft are also called OOXML, but they are not the same as the ISO/IEC 26300 standard. Confusing? Hmm, yes. That one, about which we know very few besides that the ITTF refuses to share it with the world, will be implemented by MS Office 14, the next version Office around 2010 or 2011.</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>And me who thinks there were hundreds of OOXML implementations? Where are they? Gone, gone, gone, with the wind, just like the Old South of Scarlet O&#8217;Hara, a fantasy of past times, which OOXML today turns out to be.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">I willingly put the news item on the lack of support of OOXML by Microsoft Office 2007 first, because I get the feeling that these are the most important news here. But if you</span> <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx"><span lang="en-US">check the source</span></a> <span lang="en-US">, you will also see the other very important news item: Microsoft will integrate the native support of ODF in Microsoft Office 2007. This calls for several comments. First, what Microsoft will do exactly is left to be seen. We are told that the ODF support will come with the Office 2007 Service Pack 2 that will be released in 2009. That&#8217;s a long time before the market can benefit from ODF in Microsoft products. Perhaps more disturbingly, Microsoft announces the support for ODF 1.1. I understand that&#8217;s the majority of the ODF documents out there, and I would understand this as being a very pragmatic choice if its support was not scheduled in 2009, that is, months and months after ODF 1.2 will be released (at least as definite specification). That is something I have trouble understanding. The second question I have is what kind of native support we&#8217;re talking about. I am inclined to think that we might have an actual quality support of ODF in Microsoft Office, but integrating a converter such as the existing ones or providing lousy support -on purpose- will not do the job. The market wants real, native, effective support of ODF (real-world version) in MS Office as soon as possible and with no strings attached. All things considered, I do however genuinely applaud Microsoft&#8217;s move and find it useful and welcome</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>provided that no games are played and transparency and openness are respected.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft is also announcing its participation to the OASIS ODF Technical Committee. One less well contemplated element in this news is that Microsoft announces that their OSP (Open Specification Promise) will cover ODF. I don&#8217;t know what to think about it at this stage, so my opinion will be transitional (no pun intended here). I am not sure how useful this is, as the OSP</span> <a href="http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted"><span lang="en-US">conveys no rights</span></a> <span lang="en-US">and is notably unsafe for Free Software implementations, dixit the Software Freedom Law Center. In short, I don&#8217;t like that announcement about the OSP. It smells bad, or at the very least dubious. In the same train of thoughts, I believe the OASIS should be wary of what Microsoft really wants to do inside the ODF TC. But here again, I am applauding the move by Microsoft, although I suspect them of having ulterior motives.</span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Last but not least, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS)</span> <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/05/the-south-afric.html"><span lang="en-US">has filed an appeal to the ISO/IEC today against OOXML</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. This is an important decision. I believe that the whole OOXML standardization process has turned into a farce, and many think the same. Perhaps the ISO will deem this appeal receivable, unless their strange world-logic will make them feel offended by this request. In short, the latest announcements should not all of a sudden redeem Microsoft for what they did to the standardization, the industry, and the citizens at large. The software vendor has actually managed to destroy trust of many people, including the European Commission, who now wants</span> <a href="http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/news/2217375/ec-investigate-microsoft-odf"><span lang="en-US">to check how well Microsoft will play with ODF</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. Old world&#8217;s paranoïa? No. But somebody&#8217;s got to do something about it, somehow.</span></li> +</ul> +<p lang="en-US">The points above call for some closing comments. How will this affect the industry? It is too early to tell, and besides, these are just announcements. We will see what kind of beef will be served later on. On the front of open standards, this could be a moderate success. If Microsoft walks the line, we will see an expansion of interoperability across the industry, the users and the vendors; but we&#8217;re still waiting for Microsoft Office to use ODF by default.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p> <span lang="en-US">In the end, this will have been a tremendous waste of time. I&#8217;m sure that Microsoft will try to gain some advantage from OOXML, as broken as it is. They could try to reproduce what they managed to do with .NET and CLR by standardizing and opening only a subset of the .Net API , thus letting Novell create a very limited .Net implementation, Mono. Regardless of what the future options could be, the OOXML standardization will prove to be the single most destructive episode of the standardization history. No other standard will have been paid so dearly to achieve so few, while in the real world, the unspecified file format called OOXML and used by Microsoft Office 2007 will continue to lock in generations of users; <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9949736-16.html">Sharepoint will not stop using OOXML,</a> as Matt Asay points out. All this, to put it to rest, begs one and final comment, led to nothing more than what we had start off with: a real open standard (ODF), a proprietary format, and the vague premise of an ISO standard. Urinating on a violin would not have taken us any further.</span> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p><br clear="left" /></p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=69&akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_69" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></p></p></content:encoded> + <dc:date>2008-05-23T15:50:20+00:00</dc:date> +</item> <item rdf:about="http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=808";> <title>Benjamin Horst: OpenOffice.org Extensions: Sun Presenter Screen</title> <link>http://www.solidoffice.com/archives/808</link> @@ -268,12 +293,5 @@ </p></p></content:encoded> <dc:date>2008-05-09T15:55:33+00:00</dc:date> </item> -<item rdf:about="tag:google.com,2005:reader/item/5625bf3611dabd43"> - <title>GullFOSS: A New User Experience Team Logo</title> - <link>http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/a_new_user_experience_team</link> - <content:encoded><p> <img vspace="0" hspace="0" border="0" align="bottom" alt="New UX Logo" src="http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png" /></p><p> </p><p><font size="3">I'm happy to announce the new logo of the User Experience Team.<br />The main goal of the logo is to penetrate core values of the project:<br /><br /></font></p><ul><li><font size="3">Usability,</font></li><li><font size="3">Productivity,</font></li><li><font size="3">Enjoyment<br /></font></li></ul><font size="3"><br />The three terms summarize in a very short manner what the User<br />Experience Team's overall goals are. The list below describes the<br />meaning a little bit more in detail:<br /><br /><b>Usability:</b><br />This term explains the ease with which people can work with<br />OpenOffice.org to archive their goal in a particular context in an<br />effective and efficient manner. Sadly, this term is usually meant to<br />describe the âuser friendlinessâ in the field of computer-human<br />interaction.<br /><br /><b>Productivity:</b><br />This term accompanies âusabilityâ because of the general<br />misunderstanding of meaning âuser friendlinessâ only. Again, it<br />emphasizes that working with OpenOffice.org should raise the<br />âproductivityâ significantly.<br /><br /><b>Enjoyment:</b><br />Working with OpenOffice.org should be pleasant. This is important, if<br />OpenOffice.org wants to attract new users and keep the experienced ones.<br />Currently, OpenOffice.org loses many potential users who dislike the<br />overall behavior/look of OpenOffice.org. But there is also a serious<br />fact: people which are happy with a product tend to be more creative in<br />their solution findings.<br /><br />The logo is the first step to improve the external communication of the<br />User Experience project. If you want to know more, then please have a<br />look at:<br /><a href="http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication">http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication</a><br /><br /><br />As always feedback and comments are highly appreciated.<br /><br />Christian</font></content:encoded> - <dc:date>2008-05-09T06:33:08+00:00</dc:date> - <dc:creator>Christian Jansen</dc:creator> -</item> </rdf:RDF> File [changed]: rss20.xml Url: http://marketing.openoffice.org/source/browse/marketing/www/planet/rss20.xml?r1=1.274&r2=1.275 Delta lines: +26 -7 -------------------- --- rss20.xml 2008-05-23 12:00:06+0000 1.274 +++ rss20.xml 2008-05-23 18:00:10+0000 1.275 @@ -8,6 +8,32 @@ <description>Marketing Planet - http://marketing.openoffice.org/planet/</description> <item> + <title>Charles Schulz: How to urinate on a violin</title> + <guid>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/</guid> + <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/05/23/how-to-urinate-on-a-violin/</link> + <description><p>The story of OOXML and in general the story of proprietary formats and protocols being used and promoted to control the market and the access of citizens to digital re <span lang="en-US">sources is a long but fascinating one. The three (yes, three) last episodes of the OOXML story are a good example of that.</span> +<p lang="en-US">Ever since Wednesday night, three important news were announced. Let me comment each of them as briefly as I can.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<ul> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft will not support the ISO standard sometimes referred to as OOXML in its current set of office solutions, Microsoft Office 2007 and 2008 (for Macs). The formats used by Microsoft are also called OOXML, but they are not the same as the ISO/IEC 26300 standard. Confusing? Hmm, yes. That one, about which we know very few besides that the ITTF refuses to share it with the world, will be implemented by MS Office 14, the next version Office around 2010 or 2011.</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>And me who thinks there were hundreds of OOXML implementations? Where are they? Gone, gone, gone, with the wind, just like the Old South of Scarlet O&#8217;Hara, a fantasy of past times, which OOXML today turns out to be.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">I willingly put the news item on the lack of support of OOXML by Microsoft Office 2007 first, because I get the feeling that these are the most important news here. But if you</span> <a href="http://www.microsoft.com/Presspass/press/2008/may08/05-21ExpandedFormatsPR.mspx"><span lang="en-US">check the source</span></a> <span lang="en-US">, you will also see the other very important news item: Microsoft will integrate the native support of ODF in Microsoft Office 2007. This calls for several comments. First, what Microsoft will do exactly is left to be seen. We are told that the ODF support will come with the Office 2007 Service Pack 2 that will be released in 2009. That&#8217;s a long time before the market can benefit from ODF in Microsoft products. Perhaps more disturbingly, Microsoft announces the support for ODF 1.1. I understand that&#8217;s the majority of the ODF documents out there, and I would understand this as being a very pragmatic choice if its support was not scheduled in 2009, that is, months and months after ODF 1.2 will be released (at least as definite specification). That is something I have trouble understanding. The second question I have is what kind of native support we&#8217;re talking about. I am inclined to think that we might have an actual quality support of ODF in Microsoft Office, but integrating a converter such as the existing ones or providing lousy support -on purpose- will not do the job. The market wants real, native, effective support of ODF (real-world version) in MS Office as soon as possible and with no strings attached. All things considered, I do however genuinely applaud Microsoft&#8217;s move and find it useful and welcome</span> <span lang="en-US"><em>provided that no games are played and transparency and openness are respected.</em></span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Microsoft is also announcing its participation to the OASIS ODF Technical Committee. One less well contemplated element in this news is that Microsoft announces that their OSP (Open Specification Promise) will cover ODF. I don&#8217;t know what to think about it at this stage, so my opinion will be transitional (no pun intended here). I am not sure how useful this is, as the OSP</span> <a href="http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections#Patent_rights_to_implement_the_Ecma_376_specification_have_not_been_granted"><span lang="en-US">conveys no rights</span></a> <span lang="en-US">and is notably unsafe for Free Software implementations, dixit the Software Freedom Law Center. In short, I don&#8217;t like that announcement about the OSP. It smells bad, or at the very least dubious. In the same train of thoughts, I believe the OASIS should be wary of what Microsoft really wants to do inside the ODF TC. But here again, I am applauding the move by Microsoft, although I suspect them of having ulterior motives.</span></li> +<li> <span lang="en-US">Last but not least, the South African Bureau of Standards (SABS)</span> <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/05/the-south-afric.html"><span lang="en-US">has filed an appeal to the ISO/IEC today against OOXML</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. This is an important decision. I believe that the whole OOXML standardization process has turned into a farce, and many think the same. Perhaps the ISO will deem this appeal receivable, unless their strange world-logic will make them feel offended by this request. In short, the latest announcements should not all of a sudden redeem Microsoft for what they did to the standardization, the industry, and the citizens at large. The software vendor has actually managed to destroy trust of many people, including the European Commission, who now wants</span> <a href="http://www.vnunet.com/itweek/news/2217375/ec-investigate-microsoft-odf"><span lang="en-US">to check how well Microsoft will play with ODF</span></a> <span lang="en-US">. Old world&#8217;s paranoïa? No. But somebody&#8217;s got to do something about it, somehow.</span></li> +</ul> +<p lang="en-US">The points above call for some closing comments. How will this affect the industry? It is too early to tell, and besides, these are just announcements. We will see what kind of beef will be served later on. On the front of open standards, this could be a moderate success. If Microsoft walks the line, we will see an expansion of interoperability across the industry, the users and the vendors; but we&#8217;re still waiting for Microsoft Office to use ODF by default.</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p> <span lang="en-US">In the end, this will have been a tremendous waste of time. I&#8217;m sure that Microsoft will try to gain some advantage from OOXML, as broken as it is. They could try to reproduce what they managed to do with .NET and CLR by standardizing and opening only a subset of the .Net API , thus letting Novell create a very limited .Net implementation, Mono. Regardless of what the future options could be, the OOXML standardization will prove to be the single most destructive episode of the standardization history. No other standard will have been paid so dearly to achieve so few, while in the real world, the unspecified file format called OOXML and used by Microsoft Office 2007 will continue to lock in generations of users; <a href="http://news.cnet.com/8301-13505_3-9949736-16.html">Sharepoint will not stop using OOXML,</a> as Matt Asay points out. All this, to put it to rest, begs one and final comment, led to nothing more than what we had start off with: a real open standard (ODF), a proprietary format, and the vague premise of an ISO standard. Urinating on a violin would not have taken us any further.</span> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p lang="en-US">&nbsp;</p> +<p><br clear="left" /></p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=69&akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_69" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></p></p></description> + <pubDate>Fri, 23 May 2008 15:50:20 +0000</pubDate> +</item> +<item> <title>Benjamin Horst: OpenOffice.org Extensions: Sun Presenter Screen</title> <guid>http://www.solidoffice.com/?p=808</guid> <link>http://www.solidoffice.com/archives/808</link> @@ -256,13 +282,6 @@ </p></p></description> <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 15:55:33 +0000</pubDate> </item> -<item> - <title>GullFOSS: A New User Experience Team Logo</title> - <guid>tag:google.com,2005:reader/item/5625bf3611dabd43</guid> - <link>http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/a_new_user_experience_team</link> - <description><p> <img vspace="0" hspace="0" border="0" align="bottom" alt="New UX Logo" src="http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png" /></p><p> </p><p><font size="3">I'm happy to announce the new logo of the User Experience Team.<br />The main goal of the logo is to penetrate core values of the project:<br /><br /></font></p><ul><li><font size="3">Usability,</font></li><li><font size="3">Productivity,</font></li><li><font size="3">Enjoyment<br /></font></li></ul><font size="3"><br />The three terms summarize in a very short manner what the User<br />Experience Team's overall goals are. The list below describes the<br />meaning a little bit more in detail:<br /><br /><b>Usability:</b><br />This term explains the ease with which people can work with<br />OpenOffice.org to archive their goal in a particular context in an<br />effective and efficient manner. Sadly, this term is usually meant to<br />describe the âuser friendlinessâ in the field of computer-human<br />interaction.<br /><br /><b>Productivity:</b><br />This term accompanies âusabilityâ because of the general<br />misunderstanding of meaning âuser friendlinessâ only. Again, it<br />emphasizes that working with OpenOffice.org should raise the<br />âproductivityâ significantly.<br /><br /><b>Enjoyment:</b><br />Working with OpenOffice.org should be pleasant. This is important, if<br />OpenOffice.org wants to attract new users and keep the experienced ones.<br />Currently, OpenOffice.org loses many potential users who dislike the<br />overall behavior/look of OpenOffice.org. But there is also a serious<br />fact: people which are happy with a product tend to be more creative in<br />their solution findings.<br /><br />The logo is the first step to improve the external communication of the<br />User Experience project. If you want to know more, then please have a<br />look at:<br /><a href="http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication">http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/User_Experience/Project_Strategy/External_Communication</a><br /><br /><br />As always feedback and comments are highly appreciated.<br /><br />Christian</font></description> - <pubDate>Fri, 09 May 2008 06:33:08 +0000</pubDate> -</item> </channel> </rss> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
![http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png"](http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png"){kind=link}
![http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png"](http://ux.openoffice.org/_media/ux-ooo-logo-rgb-259-121.png"){kind=link}