[odf-discuss] [Fwd: OOXML]

[marbux]

On 1/26/07, Pamela Jones <pj at groklaw.net> wrote:
> Well, at least we can agree that it's wise to be sensitive to reactions.
>
Sure, but that doesn't mean we should mechanically honor the request.
We need to confine the conversation about this to the private list
until we have consensus among the participants.

Best regards,

Marbux




>
>
> Alex Hudson wrote:
> > Pamela Jones wrote:
> >> It's elitist and inaccurate, but the truth is, the public is impacted
> >> by whatever is adopted by any standards body. They have the full right
> >> to express their concerns too.
> >
> > I'm not saying they don't have that right.
> >
> > What I _am_ saying is that if you actually want your point to be taken
> > seriously, you write e-mails carefully and with due thought about who
> > you're writing to.
> >
> > Quite frankly, I doubt at this point it makes much of a difference:
> > people are surely writing large numbers of form letters to these people,
> > repeating the same basic points in such a way as to patronise the reader
> > (as an excellent example, I don't think telling people they shouldn't
> > standardise a 6000 page spec. is a good point to make - especially when
> > there are points, such as the vector art markup language, which do
> > deserve to be mentioned). I fear the good letters will now be lost in a
> > sea of righteous indignation.
> >
> > Alex.
> > _______________________________________________
> > odf-discuss mailing list
> > odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> > http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
> >
> _______________________________________________
> odf-discuss mailing list
> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.org
> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.org/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>