Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

[News] [Rival] Microsoft's OOXML Lies Evolve, Continue

  • Subject: [News] [Rival] Microsoft's OOXML Lies Evolve, Continue
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Thu, 27 Dec 2007 03:18:42 +0000
  • Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy
  • Organization: Netscape / schestowitz.com
  • User-agent: KNode/0.10.4
Bait and Switch

,----[ Quote
| So what Ecma is offering SC34 is nothing close to what was promised. Ecma is 
| really seeking to transfer to SC34 the responsibility of spending the next 3 
| years fixing errors in OOXML 1.0, while future versions of OOXML ("technical 
| revisions") are controlled by Microsoft, in Ecma, in a process without 
| transparency, and as should now be obvious to all, without sufficient quality 
| controls.     
`----

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-32595/bait-and-switch

New proposed dispositions extend progress in addressing all National Body
comments, seek to document and resolve legacy issues – Nearly 2/3 of comments
now reviewed

,----[ Quote ]
| b) Leap year calculation
| 
| ECMA-376, the original Open XML standard adopted by Ecma, treats 1900 as a 
| leap year in order to maintain compatibility with earlier spreadsheet 
| applications that included this error. This is an important compatibility 
| consideration, but based on the comments received by many National Bodies on 
| this issue, Ecma acknowledges that the date system should be correct. The 
| newly defined date system described in the previous item treats 1900 
| correctly. The leap-year bug will be deprecated, as described in the next 
| item.       
|                                   ^^^^^^^^^^^^^
`----

http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/New%20proposed%20dispositions%20extend%20progress%20in%20addressing%20all%20National%20Body%20comments.htm

They try to hide the bugs.


Related:

Microsoft moves the hot potatoes in a 'deprecated' basket

,----[ Quote ]
| Moving the hot potato in an 'optional' annex is not a solution. The solution 
| is to remove those horrors out of the standard, not to sideline with a 
| solution that please the vendor.  
| 
| [...]
| 
| Where is Terminator to wipe out this deprecated stuff out of the ISO planet?
`----

http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-32339/microsoft-moves-the-hot-potatoes-in-a-deprecated-basket


Bait and Switch

,----[ Quote ]
| Promises have been made. Assurances have been given. Commitments have been 
| proffered. But far less has been delivered. 
| 
| [...]
| 
| So what Ecma is offering SC34 is nothing close to what was promised. Ecma is 
| really seeking to transfer to SC34 the responsibility of spending the next 5 
| years fixing errors in OOXML 1.0, while future versions of OOXML ("technical 
| revisions") are controlled by Microsoft, in Ecma, in a process without 
| transparency, and as should now be obvious to all, without sufficient quality 
| controls.     
`----

http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/12/bait-and-switch.html


Microsoft won't commit to the open document standard it's pushing so hard

,----[ Quote ]
| Now consider this from Brian Jones, a Microsoft manager who has worked on 
| OOXML for six years. In July, Jones was asked on his blog whether Microsoft 
| would actually commit to conform to an officially standardised OOXML. His 
| response:   
| 
| ?It?s hard for Microsoft to commit to what comes out of Ecma [the European 
| standards group that has already OK?d OOXML] in the coming years, because we 
| don?t know what direction they will take the formats. We?ll of course stay 
| active and propose changes based on where we want to go with Office 14. At 
| the end of the day, though, the other Ecma members could decide to take the 
| spec in a completely different direction. ... Since it?s not guaranteed, it 
| would be hard for us to make any sort of official statement.?      
| 
| Now that?s cynical. After all this work to make OOXML a formal, independent 
| standard ? a standard created and promoted by Microsoft, remember ? Microsoft 
| won?t agree to follow it.   
`----

http://www.techworld.com/storage/features/index.cfm?featureid=3685&pagtype=all


Evidence of Microsoft Influencing OOXML Votes in Nordic States

,----[ Quote ]
| "This is how a standard is bought," Bosson wrote later. "I left the meeting 
| in protest - pissed off." 
`----

http://www.betanews.com/article/Evidence_of_Microsoft_Influencing_OOXML_Votes_in_Nordic_States/1188335569


Microsoft Memo to Partners in Sweden Surfaces: Vote Yes for OOXML - Updated

,----[ Quote ]
| He acknowledges that the rules might need to be changed.
`----

http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070829070630660


The OOXML Problem

,----[ Quote ]
| Another thing, by introducing a "new fancy" document format, MS can hold a 
| tighter grip round existing customers and get more on the false pretence that 
| they've "opened up".  
`----

http://phun-ky.net/2007/08/the-ooxml-problem


Rejecting OOXML

,----[ Quote ]
| All the CIOs say they want is XML documents; unfortunately they aren't as 
| aware as Georg Greve, above, that Microsoft's implementation of XML is 
| exceedingly half-hearted.  
`----

http://fussnotes.typepad.com/plexnex/2007/08/rejecting-ooxml.html


Interesting headline regarding XPS

,----[ Quote ]
| This is a pessimistic view, of course, but I would love to be proven 
| wrong. That means a fully transparent process where all minutes and 
| group emails are public. This means a full and open plan for the 
| active maintenance of the standard. This means a full description
|  of how the intellectual property will be be handled for everything 
| necessary to implement the specification. This means a complete 
| implementation for every platform, including Linux and the Mac.
| 
| That is, the opposite of OOXML.
`----

http://www.sutor.com/newsite/blog-open/?p=1707

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index