On Mon, 2005-11-21 at 14:03 -0500, Chad Smith wrote:
> On 11/21/05, John McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > Just heard a rumour from a journalist reading an embargoed press release
> > that Microsoft will announce an XML file format for Office which they
> > will submit to ISO as an open-standard. The journalist claimed it would
> > be announced at midnight CET.
> >
> > The monopolist is on the defensive.
> >
> > John
> 
> 
> 
> This is a good thing, though, right? I mean, people have been saying that if
> MS would only support ODF, everything would be just fine. So if MS comes up
> with an XML-based truly Open Standard (approved by ISO), then OOo could use
> it, MSO could use it, KOffice could use it, AbiWord could use it,
> WordPerfect could use it, etc. etc. etc. - and all would open 100% right, as
> long as the people making the software read and followed the ISO-approved
> Open Standard. Is that a correct statement? So why would it matter if ODF or
> MSO-OpenXML, (or whatever it will be called) gets approved by ISO? If it's
> open, it's open, right?

Yes and no. The format needs to be owned and maintained by a
vendor-neutral standards body, it needs to be able to be implemented
freely by any software package, and anyone who might have any IPR claims
to the format needs to have openly relinquished any patent etc
encumbrances in perpetuity. 

(I think that's everything - anyone for any more?)

This is exactly the process that OpenDocument has gone through. The
world doesn't really need another standard. However, a truly
open-standard office format meeting the above criteria and endorsed by
MS is clearly a better proposition that one which meets the criteria but
isn't endorsed by MS.

> What could MS do that would make this a bad thing? That's what I'm trying to
> get at.

Only *partially* meet the above criteria. In particular, failing to hand
over ownership and maintenance to a body they don't control.

John



---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

Reply via email to