Nikolai Weibull wrote:
> On Sat, Mar 29, 2008 at 8:14 PM, Bram Moolenaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Considering the recent OOXML fuzz I have lowered my appreciation for > > standards considerably. > > Considering that much of what people are complaining about regarding > OOXML is things that exist in OOXML due to Office's backwards > compatibility, this is somewhat ironic. I wasn't referring to the text of the proposed standard, I was referring to how it is forced to become a standard no matter what the quality is. Microsoft wants OOXML to become an ISO standard. Lots of people look the other way, only a small group dares to stand up and say what they think. This is all political, has nothing to do with the quality of the standard. For people who don't know what I'm talking about: http://news.google.com/news?hl=en&q=ooxml The first article at the moment has a nice overview of what is happening: http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,1000000567,10007689o-2000331761b,00.htm -- hundred-and-one symptoms of being an internet addict: 191. You rate eating establishments not by the quality of the food, but by the availability of electrical outlets for your PowerBook. /// Bram Moolenaar -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- http://www.Moolenaar.net \\\ /// sponsor Vim, vote for features -- http://www.Vim.org/sponsor/ \\\ \\\ download, build and distribute -- http://www.A-A-P.org /// \\\ help me help AIDS victims -- http://ICCF-Holland.org /// --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message from the "vim_dev" maillist. For more information, visit http://www.vim.org/maillist.php -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
