Roy Schestowitz espoused:
> OOXML is REALLY BAD (But then we already knew that didn?t we?)
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Honestly, how on earth can the US NB, for example, have just announced their
>| decision to vote yes to OOXML unless they have been thoroughly corrupted - as
>| have so many other of the ISO National bodies and sub-committees involved in
>| this whole sorry saga.
>| To my mind there will be two losers if OOXML becomes IS-29500:
>| * Us - That?s all of us as consumers and users of electronic documents
>| * ISO - They have already lost a great deal of respect and credibility.
>| If OOXML passes they will have none left. They will become an irrelevance
>| in technology standards at least.
>| I can see the IETF (The body responsible for much of what has made the
>| Internet work) becoming a far more important standards setter going forward?
> `----
> Microsoft conquered ISO by eliminating the 'unwanted' people. People have not
> forogtten yet about the incident in India.

The IETF is no place to go for a good example. It has even more lax
voting rules than ISO, and its procedures are highly prone manipulation
through filling meetings and so on.

w3c looks somewhat better, and at least patents were blocked which is
good, although the Nokia ex-Microsoft chap managed to keep ogg out of
the next HTML spec with a completely erroneous suggest that it be
proprietary, which it is anything but.

To my mind, the best place for standardisation now is sourceforge &
subversion, or git, if you prefer.

Let the source-code be the standard, and let everything else stem from

> Why Microsoft wants Indian NGOs to support OOXML?
> ,----[ Quote ]
>| Microsoft is urging Indian NGOs to support OOXML (i.e. Office Open XML)
>| format - and persuade Indian IT Secretary and the Additional Director General
>| of the Bureau of Indian Standards with letters supporting MS?s OOXML
>| proposal.
> `----
> By the way, this is Linux-related news because it shows just how much
> **corruption** is used to stifle the adoption not just of FOSS but of
> virtually any competitor to Microsoft Office. Microsoft chooses not to be a
> competitor but to continue with its "Jihad" (
> ) against
> its "enemies".

It's very closely related to linux because ODF is extremely well
supported on Linux, whereas OOXML is unlikely to ever offer reasonable
interoperability, because OOXML is about protecting and enhancing a
monopoly, it has nothing to do with letting customers own their own
services and data on open platforms, which Linux has.

| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: |
| Cola trolls: |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |