Skip to content
Welcome guest. | Register | Login | Add
About | Wiki | Legacy

ooxml


"As it currently stands, for the ISO community to adopt OOXML as a standard would be the first step toward our cherished Open Internet and Open Standards becoming an asset on the balance sheet of just one company, Microsoft. Recall that Microsoft was held liable by the US government and the EU as a proven monopolist, which illegally leveraged that monopoly to stifle competition. Here are some of the unresolved questions regarding OOXML that Microsoft cannot or simply will not answer" -- Read more


"It appears that the Gnome Foundation is participating in ECMA TC 451 regarding resolving comments and contradictions for DIS 29500. Given the technical shortcomings in the specification and the disregard for process that the backers of DIS 29500 have displayed during the process, Gnome’s participation in this activity is to the detriment of interoperability among office suits."

"Having Gnome team members promoting the agenda of its main opponent, however, is not only counter-productive but also reflects negatively on the project and its credibility" -- Read more


Microsoft itself is the surprise winner of the FFII's "Kayak Prize 2007", offered by the FFII in its NO-OOXML call for rejection of Microsoft's Office Open XML (OOXML) standards proposal. The software monopolist is honored as "Best Campaigner against OOXML Standardization".

Read more...


"Microsoft Corp. has failed in its attempt to have its Office Open XML document format fast-tracked straight to the status of an international standard by the International Organization for Standardization.

The proposal must now be revised to take into account the negative comments made during the voting process." -- Read more

Here is some apt poetry for this occasion, courtesy of Charles H. Schulz. Smiling


Co-founder of the Open Source Initiative, Eric S. Raymond, writes:

"I find that my resolve is being sorely tested. Because Microsoft's behavior in the last few months with respect to OOXML has been egregious. They haven't stopped at pushing a "standard" that is divisive, technically bogus, and an obvious tool of monopoly lock-in; they have resorted to lying, ballot-stuffing, committee-packing, and outright bribery to ram it through the ISO standardization process in ways that violate ISO's own guidelines wholesale."

"This is not behavior that we, as a community, can live with. Despite my previous determination, I find I'm almost ready to recommend that OSI tell Microsoft to ram its licenses up one of its own orifices, even if they are technically OSD compliant. Because what good is it to conform to the letter of OSD if you're raping its spirit?"