Nick Burch wrote:
Just a thought - does anyone have a contact with Microsoft legal / with an organisation that has contacts with Microsoft legal?While I am personally happy with using the OSP for a partial and possibly buggy implementation, I can see that Andy isn't. If we could get Microsoft legal to make a statement on a "best-effort implementation of the spec that might happen to have some bugs", in the same way as they have done for partial implementations of the spec, that could leave everyone happy and the poi ooxml stuff in the clear.
This would satisfy me in combination with some other issues in that legal analysis (I believe it also mentioned the confusion between optional and required). One of the patents I referenced will be difficult to not violate if you work to be compatible with docx that word/excel/etc may read (for instance) but that doesn't strictly comply with the spec or had validation errors w/regards to the schema (which if Word does this then you can bet will be a significant subset of generated docx).
Nick [1] http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx ------------------------------------------------------------------------ --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
-- Buni Meldware Communication Suite http://buni.org Multi-platform and extensible Email, Calendaring (including freebusy), Rich Webmail, Web-calendaring, ease of installation/administration.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
