Robin Laing wrote: > Fajar Priyanto wrote: >> Hello all, >> Sorry for the OT. >> Although I have been 'freed' from M$ oppression for several years now, >> my formal stance on it is quite 'neutral'. Like the saying in IT, >> "It's all just a tool for IT man, doesn't really matter whether it is >> FLOSS or M$'. >> >> But, now I've just found out how DIRTY M$ is in doing their business. >> For the last couple of days, they have been lobbying our National >> Standardization Board to make M$ OXML as the national standard. >> >> So far the voting reach a deadlock, meaning that M$ OXML is still >> rejected as the national standard. However, seeing how DIRTY M$ is, >> the next voting is still makes us worried. >> >> Has this kind of DIRTY POLITICS happens in other countries regarding >> ODF (Open Document Format) vs M$ OXML? How do we deal with it? >> http://www.noooxml.org/ >> >> As a positive point of view, I think it is an early sign that they >> have lost confidence in competing technically, and thus they're using >> this kind of "DIRTY" lobbying. >> >> Cheers, > > > As others have stated, this is old news. > > Some of Microsoft's dirty tricks over OOXML are coming into the public > view and there are peoples heads that are going to get chopped for this. > The person that released the "facts" that Microsoft bought votes in > Sweden has just cost them one supporter. Sweden has decided to abstain > from voting due to irregularities in the whole process. This was the > correct decision as they don't have time to re-vote. > > I for one wouldn't mind OOXML being approved if all the details were > released and there was no concern about licensing or patent issues. I > hope that the ISO organization decides to vote against OOXML until these > issues have been publicly discussed. > > Keep watching for updates.
While you might not mind it being approved, there are a lot of technical reasons, why it should not be. One blatant example is is cannot handle dates prior to 1900 and even at that, gets Jan & Feb 1900 wrong. Also there are many references to MS proprietary technology, that's not available to anyone else and many, many other issues. As others have mentioned, it's not a file spec, it's a partial description of how MS did things. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
