[odf-discuss] Documenting support for ODF 1.1?

[Daniel]

marbux wrote:
> His post speaks for itself. You are free to interpret it as you wish.
> Knowing Patrick and having read his post myself, I am comfortable with my
> reading of it.

You are also comfortable with your reading of the word "may" in ODF 1.0 
which you feel requires OpenOffice to preserve unknown foreign tags 
inserted by the Foundation plugin.

> 2 members, if OASIS doesn't blink first. Down from 29. A situation OASIS 
> has not only tolerated but also affirmatively encouraged for over 2 years.

So... the Foundation vastly exceeded the number of members allowed by 
OASIS rules... OASIS spent two years talking to the Foundation asking it 
to follow the rules... the Foundation never tells its sponsored members 
that it is breaking OASIS rules or that OASIS is asking for a change... 
and you think that this means that now OASIS should tolerate the same 
rule breaking in perpetuity?

> Any theory on why at this precise juncture did OASIS suddenly 

Suddenly? Haven't discussions been going on for many months? How long 
have you known about this problem?

> become so concerned about the Foundation having too many TC members

And yet it offers those members who contributed to the spec fee-waived 
membership...

> That's right. But when it goes public, do you think it can still support
> OASIS ODF? Can you spell F-O-R-K and comprehend who caused it?

Uhmm... you are planning to fork ODF because KDE, Sun and IBM agreed on 
one thing but the Foundation wanted something else?

> Do you want
> Microsoft Office writing a different flavor of ODF than the rest of the ODF
> world? When that happens, will you blame the Foundation?

Will it be Microsoft writing a "different flavour" of ODF or will it be 
the Foundation? If Microsoft writes a plugin that makes files that don't 
follow the ODF spec and calls them ODF I will blame Microsot. If the 
Foundation writes a plugin that makes files that don't follow the 
ODFspec and calls them ODF I will blame the Foundation. Same for any 
other implementor. Seems fair to me.

> Think, man, and throw some market share figures into the equation.

What's the market share of the Foundation plugin?

> Well, let's put it this way, then. The TC managed to reconcile every
> previous ballot where a no vote occurred. No one even tried this time 
> except Patrick and me.

I have never thought of you as a reconciliatory figure. On the contrary, 
you always seem divisive to me.

> You're more concerned with finding fault
> with me than you are with searching for the truth.

Some times it scares me when people say "searching for the truth" like 
that. Marbux, have you considered the other points of view on this 
issue? Not just me or Alex, but consider, do you really think that David 
Faure and Thomas Zander and KDE are out to break ODF? Or Sun and IBM? Is 
it reasonable to think that everyone outside the Foundation (KDE, Sun, 
IBM, me, Alex, or whoever) is either blinded or actively trying to hurt you?

Regards,
Daniel.