On Sun, Dec 1, 2013 at 12:22 PM, Italo Vignoli <[email protected]> wrote: > On 01/12/13 17:55, Robinson Tryon wrote: > >> In the case of OOXML, "Microsoft published the specs for XML file >> formats in 2003 and licensed them to competitors" may be correct, but >> I feel like that sentence is a bit misleading for ODF or other non-MS >> XML document formats. Perhaps just dropping the sentence altogether >> might be preferable. > > The statement is not correct, by the way, because the format is not > licensed but is free to use based on a statement provided in 2008 at the > time of OOXML standardization.
Right -- in the case of OOXML, my understanding is that their "open specification promise"[1] is tantamount to a (rather permissive) license. --R [1] http://www.microsoft.com/openspecifications/en/us/programs/osp/default.aspx -- To unsubscribe e-mail to: [email protected] Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/ Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/marketing/ All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
