Hi; I have been following this thread with some interest.
I have a curiosity question. On Thu, 2007-09-13 at 21:00 -0400, James Knott wrote: > John Meyer wrote: > > Harold Fuchs wrote: > The problem for Microsoft is that many governments and other > institutions around the world are insisting on using ISO standards. If > OOXML is not an ISO standard, it'll be ineligible. Since MS refuses to > use ODF, the only way they can sell to those organizations is to have > OOXML declared a "standard". It's quite obvious from the published > spec, that OOXML is simply an incomplete description of the way MS has > done things and is tightly tied to Windows and MS Office. It also > contains many significant bugs, such as claiming 1900 is a leap year. > It's beyond me why a new standard should carry around such baggage. > Putting aside the obvious benefits to Microsoft of having OOXML declared an ISO standard, can or does Microsoft make any claim that there is an additional benefit to the user when using OOXML? If so, how true might that claim be? -- Regards Bill --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
