[odf-discuss] Gnome, Ecma, and what governments (and FOSS?) should have done

[M. Fioretti]

In another thread I complained with Jeff that contributing to document
MS formats is wrong and he, very understandably, answered more or less
"how can documenting so many dark areas be bad"?

Jeff's reaction is justified because I forgot to clarify part of my
thinking with respect to this issue, so I'll do it now.

Documenting COMPLETELY, once and for all, as soon as possible, how
billions of existing documents were locked into Microsoft's hands SO
THAT THEY CAN BE FREED or at least be completely usable and
convertable when needed, is an absolutely crucial and urgent task. In
this context, what Jody and many other specialists have done and are
doing is extremely valuable and I'm happy that this is happening.

*BUT* it is the way it is happening, that is inside the
standardization process, that is de-facto helping them to get ISO
labels, that seems wrong and really counterproductive to me. _This_ is
where I have the feeling that Gnome was fooled and that is actually
and actively helping to perpetuate a real mess. What Gnome was doing
WILL (once it's ISO it's much harder to keep it out of Public
Administrations!) increase the number of NEW OOXML files in Public
Administrations in the next years: this is what I find hard to forgive,
justify or not see as a bad thing.

What I would have liked to see happen, instead, is Governments (backed
by FOSS people, Consumer Associations, whatever...) telling Microsoft:

1) We let you put us in a huge mess because we were ignorant, but now
we have figured out how things stand, so from now on things will go as
follows:

2) Only ONE standard really open for all new public documents. The ONE
   standard which is already viable and is already ISO, ODF.  Period.
   No ifs, buts, no more time wasted pursuing theoretical
   alternatives, nothing. Two+ standards for the SAME purpose are
   ridiculous at every level. Those who can't support ODF, don't even
   try to bid for public contracts or interact with PAs in any way

3) You (Microsoft) created this mess with existing files, you clean it
   up, that is: if you want to be allowed to bid for future public
   contracts, BESIDES being compliant with point 2 you must ALSO, at
   YOUR expenses, pay experts like Jody that help you to document all
   what is needed to free the EXISTING documents. And without any
   expectation that all this documentation ever becomes a standard at
   ISO or any other level, since it's ONLY relevant to clean up old
   files (a standard that specifies how things SHOULD HAVE BEEN
   DONE??? Now that's ridiculous, isn't it?)

so it would have helped if nobody outside Microsoft had helped them to
do it in a way that puts them closer to ISO recognition, that's where
my complain came from.

Pretty much the same things that happen when some company pollutes,
really:

1) just clean up and pay the bills
2) these are the rules to do _further_ business from now on

Ciao,
	Marco
-- 
Help *everybody* love Free Standards and Free Software
http://digifreedom.net/