[odf-discuss] EOOXML contradicted by the UK

[Russell Ossendryver]

http://www.computing.co.uk/itweek/news/2173717/open-standards-bodies-call-halt



On 2/6/07, Pamela Jones <pj at groklaw.net> wrote:
> Someone just left this on Groklaw:
>
> Received the following e-mail from Standards Council of Canada:
> ***************
> Good Morning
> My apologies but we had so many comments on this document which I posted
> on our
> electronic forum for the members to review.
>
> Just to let you know we (Canada) voted "disapprove".
>
> Again thank you for your concern.
>
> Regards....
>
> [REDACTED], Program Officer
> Standards Council of Canada
>
>
> Daniel Carrera wrote:
> > On Tue, 2007-02-06 at 10:55 -0800, marbux wrote:
> >> Congratulations, everyone who contributed to the effort. I especially
> >> congratulate Daniel for an incredible amount of sterling work on the
> >> EOOXML Issues document despite living on hot dogs and not sleeping for
> >> days. It paid off.
> >
> > :-D
> >
> > Thanks. And congratulations to you for all your work in that document,
> > and all the people who helped. And whoever came up with that idea in the
> > first place deserves a free beer/milkshake. :)
> >
> >> If someone comes up with a link to the BSI contradiction document, I'd
> >> love to read it.
> >
> > Me too. I'm keen to know what they said. I wonder if it's something easy
> > to resolve or something very fundamental.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Daniel.
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>