The problem is that the above url is far from being truthful. You do
not have to go too far to find problems with it, starting with the
discussion that we were having on this forum regarding the Microsoft OSP
patent promise.
I have issued with it, it is only for *required* parts
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 11:44:40AM -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
The problem is that the above url is far from being truthful. You do
not have to go too far to find problems with it, starting with the
discussion that we were having on this forum regarding the Microsoft OSP
patent
What does all of this have to do with the GNOME foundation?
Andreas
On Wed, 2007-18-07 at 01:37 -0400, Miguel de Icaza wrote:
I would not go as far as saying
that OOXML is a sham just because ODF helps us advance our own FLOSS
agenda.
Why not? Surely there is nothing
On Wed, 2007-07-18 at 08:31 +0100, Glynn Foster wrote:
In light of Dave's recently departure from the board, we've invited Lucas
Rocha
to join the board for the remaining time left on our current term. We felt
that
Lucas was a good fit to compliment the current set of board members, and
OOXML is a sham as a free/open standard, due to dozens of flaws
described in http://www.grokdoc.net/index.php/EOOXML_objections.
The problem is that the above url is far from being truthful. You do
not have to go too far to find problems with it, starting with the
Interesting that you should say this. Yesterday I read Eben Moglen's
response to my questions about the OOXML patent issue. He said
Microsoft's OSP is worthless.
I have emailed Eben, hopefully he can share with me what he thinks is
worthless about the OSP and maybe we can request the terms
