> 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 wrong with telling the truth to
> support the free software cause.
>
> If OOXML were not a sham, it would be dishonest to call it
Interest groups have used standards to club their opponents for many
years. Its nothing new.
It is insulting because of the contemptuous attitude it shows.
Really that speaks about you, not about me.
I would not go as far as saying
that OOXML is a sham just because ODF helps us
> 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.
The supp
