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

[Daniel]

M. Fioretti wrote:
[summary: Documenting MS format so that files that a currently locked 
into MS can be freed is a good thing]
> *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.

Comments:
- I'm not sure that the ECMA level carries much weight (or for that 
matter, OASIS). In Europe only ISO matters. So, the fact that it is 
being documented inside the ECMA process is not in and on itself a bad 
thing.
- In fact, I'd argue that it's better inside ECMA were other 
participants have more ability to extract clearer information than if 
the process was entirely ad-hoc.
- So, the only issue that remains is increasing the chances that OOXML 
become an ISO standard. Jody has stated that he is not participating in 
the ISO conflict resolution process.
- If you argue that the mere fact that OOX is in ECMA improves it 
chances of becoming ISO, I'd counter that OOX would be in ECMA whether 
or not Jody participates, so this has nothing to do with Jody or Gnome.
- I do not believe you have supported your argument that Gnome is 
helping OOXML become an ISO standard, given that Jody is not 
participating in the conflict resolution process.

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

None of those have anything to do with the actions of Gnome or Jody. 
Let's not confuse the issue or go on tangents.

Daniel.