Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
Hi Rui, I just read through this whole thread from start to finish after having gotten a little behind on my email. Personally the ODF versus OOXML discussion is only of secondary interest to me, but one thing struck me through this whole debate. Rui, it is fine to disagree with Miguel and Michael about the qualities or lack of such of the OOXML specification. But I don't think the kind of rude personal attacks and snide remarks you been targeting at Miguel and Michael throughout this discussion belong anywhere. Miguel and Michael have each done more for free software than most of us can even hope to aspire to, and thus trying to smear them only makes you look bad and for people to consider your arguments to be without merit. I assume the reason this debate is on the gnome foundation list is because there is a wish to have the GNOME foundation come out stronger in favour of ODF. But if that is the goal I think a more professional attitude is a better tool, as the current badmouthing do not entice me at least, to get stronger GNOME endorsement ODF. Christian On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 21:34 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 03:37:06PM -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote: Hello, Also, why do you say the format is open? Can you tell me how Word95 does auto-space ? Can you tell me how ODF lays out paragraphs or does line-breaking or wraps text to shaped embedded objects or ... ? Nothing in OOXML spec explains how Word95 does autospace, so how can a full implementation of OOXML respect that tag's meaning? The topic is addressed here: http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/09/specifying-the-document-settings.aspx Use OpenOffice.org 1.1 line spacing this argument is funny, and was addressed at the Portuguese Technical Commission. There is an essential difference between SecretRuleYouCan'tKnowOfProductFuBar and UnderSpecifiedRuleYouCanReadSourceCodeToCompleteKnowledge And it addresses in particular the issue of whether it should be removed or not. Nice, just another repeatition the argument of legacy. What about KWord? Can it support legacy formats, or is legacy only for Microsoft? If it's only for Microsoft (since KWord most definitely can't do it), then how can it be part of an open standard? Of course this is my position on technical merits, others implementors might have other views. On political and activist grounds you might also reach different conclusions, but I will find it difficult in the future to say with a straight face in court well, they did not specify enough, so this format created lock-in. Specially from people who work for a company that is strategically aligned with Microsoft. Ah, the old guilt by association way of constructing a logical argument. Always a fine choice. Well, pot, meet kettle. However, you are the one who said almost word for word what another Microsoft employee said at the Portuguese Meeting. It's fortunate that he didn't speak Portuguese, this is how I could tell you used almost word for word what he said. Do they give lectures on how to answer? I'm curious :) Rui ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
Michael throughout this discussion belong anywhere. Miguel and Michael have each done more for free software than most of us can even hope to aspire to That doesn't mean what they are doing now is good for free software. Just ask Mr Raymond ;) ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
Miguel and Michael have done remarkable jobs in many situations, and as such deserve a lot of praise for those jobs. This one, however, is not a remarkable job and deserves critic. Regards, Rui ps: is how can we do autoSpaceLikeWord95 a snide remark? Is 2004/48/EC a snide remark? all those things will affect us (you're from Europe, right?) very soon. On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 04:05:48PM +0200, Christian F.K. Schaller wrote: Hi Rui, I just read through this whole thread from start to finish after having gotten a little behind on my email. Personally the ODF versus OOXML discussion is only of secondary interest to me, but one thing struck me through this whole debate. Rui, it is fine to disagree with Miguel and Michael about the qualities or lack of such of the OOXML specification. But I don't think the kind of rude personal attacks and snide remarks you been targeting at Miguel and Michael throughout this discussion belong anywhere. Miguel and Michael have each done more for free software than most of us can even hope to aspire to, and thus trying to smear them only makes you look bad and for people to consider your arguments to be without merit. I assume the reason this debate is on the gnome foundation list is because there is a wish to have the GNOME foundation come out stronger in favour of ODF. But if that is the goal I think a more professional attitude is a better tool, as the current badmouthing do not entice me at least, to get stronger GNOME endorsement ODF. Christian On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 21:34 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 03:37:06PM -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote: Hello, Also, why do you say the format is open? Can you tell me how Word95 does auto-space ? Can you tell me how ODF lays out paragraphs or does line-breaking or wraps text to shaped embedded objects or ... ? Nothing in OOXML spec explains how Word95 does autospace, so how can a full implementation of OOXML respect that tag's meaning? The topic is addressed here: http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/09/specifying-the-document-settings.aspx Use OpenOffice.org 1.1 line spacing this argument is funny, and was addressed at the Portuguese Technical Commission. There is an essential difference between SecretRuleYouCan'tKnowOfProductFuBar and UnderSpecifiedRuleYouCanReadSourceCodeToCompleteKnowledge And it addresses in particular the issue of whether it should be removed or not. Nice, just another repeatition the argument of legacy. What about KWord? Can it support legacy formats, or is legacy only for Microsoft? If it's only for Microsoft (since KWord most definitely can't do it), then how can it be part of an open standard? Of course this is my position on technical merits, others implementors might have other views. On political and activist grounds you might also reach different conclusions, but I will find it difficult in the future to say with a straight face in court well, they did not specify enough, so this format created lock-in. Specially from people who work for a company that is strategically aligned with Microsoft. Ah, the old guilt by association way of constructing a logical argument. Always a fine choice. Well, pot, meet kettle. However, you are the one who said almost word for word what another Microsoft employee said at the Portuguese Meeting. It's fortunate that he didn't speak Portuguese, this is how I could tell you used almost word for word what he said. Do they give lectures on how to answer? I'm curious :) Rui -- Frink! Today is Boomtime, the 66th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 20:09 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Miguel and Michael have done remarkable jobs in many situations, and as such deserve a lot of praise for those jobs. This one, however, is not a remarkable job and deserves critic. It's not about praise or doing a remarkable job. It's about respect. May I suggest that the rest of discussion in this thread be moved out of foundation-list? I don't think it's relevant to the foundation anymore. behdad Regards, Rui ps: is how can we do autoSpaceLikeWord95 a snide remark? Is 2004/48/EC a snide remark? all those things will affect us (you're from Europe, right?) very soon. On Tue, Jul 31, 2007 at 04:05:48PM +0200, Christian F.K. Schaller wrote: Hi Rui, I just read through this whole thread from start to finish after having gotten a little behind on my email. Personally the ODF versus OOXML discussion is only of secondary interest to me, but one thing struck me through this whole debate. Rui, it is fine to disagree with Miguel and Michael about the qualities or lack of such of the OOXML specification. But I don't think the kind of rude personal attacks and snide remarks you been targeting at Miguel and Michael throughout this discussion belong anywhere. Miguel and Michael have each done more for free software than most of us can even hope to aspire to, and thus trying to smear them only makes you look bad and for people to consider your arguments to be without merit. I assume the reason this debate is on the gnome foundation list is because there is a wish to have the GNOME foundation come out stronger in favour of ODF. But if that is the goal I think a more professional attitude is a better tool, as the current badmouthing do not entice me at least, to get stronger GNOME endorsement ODF. Christian On Tue, 2007-07-24 at 21:34 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: On Tue, Jul 24, 2007 at 03:37:06PM -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote: Hello, Also, why do you say the format is open? Can you tell me how Word95 does auto-space ? Can you tell me how ODF lays out paragraphs or does line-breaking or wraps text to shaped embedded objects or ... ? Nothing in OOXML spec explains how Word95 does autospace, so how can a full implementation of OOXML respect that tag's meaning? The topic is addressed here: http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/09/specifying-the-document-settings.aspx Use OpenOffice.org 1.1 line spacing this argument is funny, and was addressed at the Portuguese Technical Commission. There is an essential difference between SecretRuleYouCan'tKnowOfProductFuBar and UnderSpecifiedRuleYouCanReadSourceCodeToCompleteKnowledge And it addresses in particular the issue of whether it should be removed or not. Nice, just another repeatition the argument of legacy. What about KWord? Can it support legacy formats, or is legacy only for Microsoft? If it's only for Microsoft (since KWord most definitely can't do it), then how can it be part of an open standard? Of course this is my position on technical merits, others implementors might have other views. On political and activist grounds you might also reach different conclusions, but I will find it difficult in the future to say with a straight face in court well, they did not specify enough, so this format created lock-in. Specially from people who work for a company that is strategically aligned with Microsoft. Ah, the old guilt by association way of constructing a logical argument. Always a fine choice. Well, pot, meet kettle. However, you are the one who said almost word for word what another Microsoft employee said at the Portuguese Meeting. It's fortunate that he didn't speak Portuguese, this is how I could tell you used almost word for word what he said. Do they give lectures on how to answer? I'm curious :) Rui -- Frink! Today is Boomtime, the 66th day of Confusion in the YOLD 3173 + No matter how much you do, you never do enough -- unknown + Whatever you do will be insignificant, | but it is very important that you do it -- Gandhi + So let's do it...? ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list -- behdad http://behdad.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Code of Conduct on foundation-list
Hi, I want to suggest opting in for Code of Conduct [1] on foundation-list. See the Applies to section of CoC for what this means in practical terms. [1] http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Cheers, -- behdad http://behdad.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 20:09 +0100, Rui Miguel Silva Seabra wrote: Miguel and Michael have done remarkable jobs in many situations, and as such deserve a lot of praise for those jobs. This one, however, is not a remarkable job and deserves critic. That's not the central point in Christian's response. Let's please keep this mailing list as respectful as it has always been. Please consider reading http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct when writing to this list. Thank you, Claudio -- Claudio Saavedra [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code of Conduct on foundation-list
The foundation-list is a channel of communication of the GNOME Foundation membership and therefore is ruled by the charter and by-laws of the foundation. See http://foundation.gnome.org/about/charter/ and http://foundation.gnome.org/about/bylaws.pdf There you have established rules agreed by all of us, some of them referring to measures to take when members of the Foundation show a poor conduct. The board has authority to decide in such cases. In this context, and in the foundation related lists, an additional code of conduct is just redundant. On 7/31/07, Behdad Esfahbod [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I want to suggest opting in for Code of Conduct [1] on foundation-list. See the Applies to section of CoC for what this means in practical terms. [1] http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct -- Quim Gil /// http://desdeamericaconamor.org ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Code of Conduct on foundation-list
On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 22:52 +0300, Quim Gil wrote: In this context, and in the foundation related lists, an additional code of conduct is just redundant. Understood. But it's just easier to point people to CoC when they behave poorly. -- behdad http://behdad.org/ Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety. -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759 ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
Since I do not read what Microsoft says in standards group meetings, I thank Rui for informating us that it matches what Miguel de Icaza said here. Putting that similarity together with the nature of his statements (vague claims that that the criticism of OOXML is flawed), it becomes a cogent argument to mistrust those statements. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
Hi Richard, As someone who believes strongly about many things, yet to my knowledge always argues the case and never the person I don't see why you are coming out defending such behavior here. My criticism was mainly about the tone of the debate and for someone who himself never resorted to name calling in this discussion I don't see why you feel its defensible behavior. Christian On Tue, 2007-07-31 at 16:22 -0400, Richard Stallman wrote: Since I do not read what Microsoft says in standards group meetings, I thank Rui for informating us that it matches what Miguel de Icaza said here. Putting that similarity together with the nature of his statements (vague claims that that the criticism of OOXML is flawed), it becomes a cogent argument to mistrust those statements. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents
And put in different words: if anybody is concerned about how this issue affects the GNOME Foundation and the GNOME project in general please expose these concerns in a way we can do or say something. I think the GNOME Foundation should lend its support to the campaign against acceptance of OOXML as a official standard. ___ foundation-list mailing list foundation-list@gnome.org http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-list
