OOXML is for the most part a much simpler version to process than the
    old file formats.

If you know of something else more complex than OOXML's 6000-page
incomplete spec, does it matter?  Even supposing you are right, I
don't see that it changes anything about OOXML.

    > Thus we remain with the conclusion that it is very important to 
    > campaign for ODF and reject OOXML as a "standard".

    It seems to me that the we are trying to participate in the game of
    "club your opponent with the standard club".

Your insult is too vague to be checked, or refuted, but the reasons
why this question of standardization is important are very specific.
Governments around the world are interested in using an open standard
format.  They have to decide whether to insist on a real open
standard, such as ODF, or accept a sham open standard, OOXML.  If they
choose the former, they are likely to move somewhat to OpenOffice.
Otherwise they are likely to be stuck with Microsoft Office.
foundation-list mailing list

Reply via email to