Hi, On 12/04/2008, Andrew C. Oliver <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The key part of this blog "Notice: Sourcesense have provided speakers for > OSS Watch events in the past, and a member of Sourcesense sits on our > Advisory Committee." As the guy who sits on the Advisory Committee, I think it's important to point out that I had no input on the blog post in question, I was not even aware that it was being written until after it was published, and I doubt very much I could exert any kind of editorial influence over the assiduously impartial fine folks at OSS Watch. I point this out to provide some kind of balance to Andy's focus on it. > Microsoft chooses to engage the project entirely through a third party. As do many other organisations, I'm sure. Do we treat them all with blanket -1s? > mysteriously OSSWatch now blog on why the OSSP Microsoft posted is splended > but just worded poorly. I think you're not helping your case here by ascribing secret handshakes and ulterior motives. As an advisory service set up to provide information about open source (and with a track record of discussing open standards), it seems quite logical that some discussion of the Microsoft OOXML should occur, and that it should include mention of the POI effort. What's so mysterious about that? Andrew. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
