[odf-discuss] Fwd: W3C Lead on CDF says OpenDocument Fellowship
Position on CDF Makes No Sense
Pamela Jones
pj at groklaw.net
Tue Nov 13 13:25:55 EST 2007
What state were they formed in as a nonprofit?
Ryan Singer wrote:
> David, all,
>
> Gary wanted me to let you know that the letters have been sent to the
> State AG and the IRS to formally dissolve the OpenDocument Foundation.
> He invited the fellowship to adopt the name at any point in the
> future for a new venture if it became convenient. He said he'd be
> more than happy to coach someone on how to gain 501(c)3 status in the
> US.
>
> --
> Ryan
>
> On Nov 12, 2007 8:25 AM, J David Eisenberg <catcode at catcode.com> wrote:
>> On Mon, 12 Nov 2007, Chris Puttick wrote:
>>
>>> The Foundation as was is allegedly no more - their front page
>>> apparently had some message about their being wound-up, but the base
>>> URL now returns merely a 404. To be reborn the CDF Foundation?
>> FYI: I registered the names opendocumentfoundation.com and
>> opendocumentfoundation.org when they first started up. The names were
>> about to expire on 6 Nov 2007, and I renewed them. There's no server to
>> back them up, but I have the names, so they can't be acquired by anyone
>> with malicious intention.
>>
>>
>> > > Chris
>>> On 11/11/2007, Pamela Jones <pj at groklaw.net> wrote:
>>>> What their strategies are? I think that is clear enough. You would like
>>>> them to have time to regroup and find better ways to attack ODF?
>>>>
>>>> Their current difficulties are self-inflicted. They have attacked not
>>>> only ODF, not only companies, but individuals. I have some information
>>>> that has drifted back to me that they are attacking individuals not only
>>>> in public but in emails privately to those they try to influence. This
>>>> email that wasn't supposed to be seen, allegedly, is the tip of the
>>>> iceberg.
>>>>
>>>> It's a disgusting smear campaign, frankly, and I hope they cut it out,
>>>> but whether they do or not, there is zero reason in my view to grant
>>>> them any room to regroup or to pretend that this should all be hidden.
>>>> That is how they've been doing so much damage, with private emails to
>>>> folks that they'd be upset to have made public, I expect, because their
>>>> effectiveness depends on no one contradicting the smear.
>>>>
>>>> For example, this story about W3c backing them up is not true. Period.
>>>>
>>>> PJ
>>>>
>>>> Ryan Singer wrote:
>>>>> PJ,
>>>>>
>>>>> Gary and his team are still figuring out where they are going and what
>>>>> there strategies are. Until they are ready for an announcement, it is
>>>>> not a discussion to do on a list with public archives.
>>>>>
>>>>> I understand that many people feel upset and betrayed by the new
>>>>> direction Gary has taken. I ask that everyone please remember his
>>>>> years of service as the only non-corporate contributer to the ODF TC.
>>>>> For years gary had a perfect attendance record, working hard to
>>>>> protect the communities interests. Please allow Gary and C. the
>>>>> benefit of a doubt, if only out o respect for everything he has
>>>>> contributed, for free, on a totally volunteer basis.
>>>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Ryan Singer
>>>>> Co-founder
>>>>> OpenDocument Fellowship
>>>>> 650-743-2785
>>>>>
>>>>> On Nov 10, 2007 6:46 AM, Pamela Jones <pj at groklaw.net> wrote:
>>>>>> How about he apologizes and substantiates what he wrote?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> It's out there. He may not have meant it to be, but it is. And he is now
>>>>>> responsible to prove his allegations or withdraw them publicly in the
>>>>>> same venue where they were made.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Ryan Singer wrote:
>>>>>>> I've just found out that gary meant to send this as a person reply to
>>>>>>> me, and forgot to check the headers to see I had CC'd the fellowship.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Obviously, what Gary intended to write as a private communication to
>>>>>>> an old friend, in this time when he is getting all of this stressful
>>>>>>> negative press, is not fit for public or list consumption.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Gary asked me to apologize about this and to say that it was not his
>>>>>>> intention to flame this list. Gary and his team are currently
>>>>>>> undergoing a very rough time and trying to reposition themselves for
>>>>>>> the future. Please, lets give the benefit of the doubt to sombody who
>>>>>>> has done so much work on our behalf.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>> Ryan Singer
>>>>>>> Co-founder
>>>>>>> OpenDocument Fellowship
>>>>>>> 1-650-743-2785
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2007 11:50 PM, Gary Edwards <gary.edwards at da-vinci.us> wrote:
>>>>>>>> Hi Ryan,
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Chris Lilley's comments are in direct opposition to those we received a week
>>>>>>>> ago from Doug Shepers, the head of the CDF Workgroup. doug however asked
>>>>>>>> that we not publicise his comments until Sir Timothy has had a chance to
>>>>>>>> weigh in. Our CDF support is solid. Even within Sun and IBM!!!! They've
>>>>>>>> been arguing for years that CDF is the way to go. Today IBM admitted to us
>>>>>>>> that ODF is a transitional fiel format only. They know that CDF is the
>>>>>>>> future, and have spent enormous resources positioning WebSphere, Lotus
>>>>>>>> Notes, and the Eclipse Community in that direction. ODF is a transitional
>>>>>>>> desktop play only.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> The ODF mob has gone nuts trying to shut off the exits. The worst thing
>>>>>>>> they could have ever done is attack CDF. Watch. IBM admits that they lit
>>>>>>>> the fire, and now they can't control the tmob. The plan was to discredit us
>>>>>>>> personally. Now that CDF is under attack by the mob, IBM CALLED US, asking
>>>>>>>> for help!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! This was a two plus
>>>>>>>> hour phone conference this afternoon. I kid you not.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> But hey, thanks for staying on top of this :)
>>>>>>>> ~ge~
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Nov 9, 2007 9:08 AM, Ryan Singer <ryan.singer at gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Forwarded conversation
>>>>>>>>> Subject: W3C Lead on CDF says OpenDocument Fellowship Position on CDF
>>>>>>>> Makes No Sense
>>>>>>>>> ------------------------
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> From: <Andrew.Updegrove at gesmer.com>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Nov 9, 2007 8:21 AM
>>>>>>>>> To: Andrew.Updegrove at gesmer.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Earlier in the week, many technology reporters were wrestling with what to
>>>>>>>>> make of the OpenDocument Foundation's announcement that it was abandoning
>>>>>>>>> support for ODF in favor of CDF, a W3C specification-in-process that few
>>>>>>>>> had ever heard of, and no one seemed to know much about. Those that did
>>>>>>>>> examine CDF were left puzzled trying to figure out how it could possibly
>>>>>>>>> function as an alternative to ODF.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> To find out the facts, I interviewed Chris Lilley, the W3C lead for the
>>>>>>>> CDF
>>>>>>>>> project, and his answer couldn't have been more clear: "The one thing I'd
>>>>>>>>> really want your readers to know is that CDF was not created to be, and
>>>>>>>>> isn't suitable for use as, an office format." In fact, it isn't even an
>>>>>>>>> format at all - although it has been matched for export purposes with
>>>>>>>>> another W3C specification, called WICD - but WICD is a non-editable format
>>>>>>>>> intended for viewing only. Moreover, no one from the Foundation has
>>>>>>>> joined
>>>>>>>>> W3C, nor explained to W3C what the Foundation's founders have in mind.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> It is highly unfortunate that the founders of a tax exempt organization
>>>>>>>>> that solicited donations, "To support the community of volunteers in
>>>>>>>>> promoting, improving and providing user assistance for ODF and software
>>>>>>>>> designed to operate on data in this format," should publicly announce that
>>>>>>>>> it believes that ODF will fail. By endorsing a standard that has no
>>>>>>>>> rational relationship to office formats at all, they can only serve to
>>>>>>>>> confuse the marketplace and undermine the efforts of the global community
>>>>>>>>> they claimed to serve.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Further details are here:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20071109070012244
>>>>>>>>> As always, please let me know if you would like to be removed from this
>>>>>>>>> list.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrew Updegrove
>>>>>>>>> Gesmer Updegrove LLP
>>>>>>>>> 40 Broad Street
>>>>>>>>> Boston, Massachusetts 02109
>>>>>>>>> T: 617/350-6800
>>>>>>>>> F: 617/350-6878
>>>>>>>>> www.gesmer.com
>>>>>>>>> www.consortiuminfo.org
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> *****************************************
>>>>>>>>> Any tax information or written tax advice contained herein (including any
>>>>>>>> attachments) is not intended to be and cannot be used by any taxpayer for
>>>>>>>> the purpose of avoiding tax penalties that may be imposed on the taxpayer.
>>>>>>>> (The foregoing legend has been affixed pursuant to U.S. Treasury Regulations
>>>>>>>> governing tax practice.)
>>>>>>>>> Electronic mail from Gesmer Updegrove LLP, 40 Broad Street, Boston, MA
>>>>>>>> 02109. Voice: (617) 350-6800, Fax: (617) 350-6878. This communication is
>>>>>>>> intended only for the use of the individual or entity named as the
>>>>>>>> addressee. It may contain information which is privileged and/or
>>>>>>>> confidential under applicable law. If you are not the intended recipient or
>>>>>>>> such recipient's employee or agent, you are hereby notified that any
>>>>>>>> dissemination, copy or disclosure of this communication is strictly
>>>>>>>> prohibited. If you have received this communication in error, please
>>>>>>>> immediately notify Christopher O'Sullivan at (617) 350-6800 and notify the
>>>>>>>> sender by electronic mail. Please expunge this communication without making
>>>>>>>> any copies. Thank you for your cooperation.
>>>>>>>>> ----------
>>>>>>>>> From: Ryan Singer <ryan.singer at gmail.com>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Nov 9, 2007 9:01 AM
>>>>>>>>> To: Andrew.Updegrove at gesmer.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andrew,
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> OpenDocument Fellowship != OpenDocument Foundation. The Fellowship
>>>>>>>>> does not agree with the new direction the foundation has taken. Your
>>>>>>>>> subject line mentions the fellowship, while the rest of your email is
>>>>>>>>> about the foundation. Please send out a correction.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> Ryan Singer
>>>>>>>>> Co-founder
>>>>>>>>> OpenDocument Fellowship
>>>>>>>>> 650-743-2785
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> _________________
>>>>>>>>> Ryan Singer
>>>>>>>>> ----------
>>>>>>>>> From: <Andrew.Updegrove at gesmer.com>
>>>>>>>>> Date: Nov 9, 2007 9:02 AM
>>>>>>>>> To: Ryan.Singer at gmail.com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> My sincere apologies - I'll change it immediately.
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> Andy
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> "Ryan Singer"
>>>>>>>>> < ryan.singer at gmai
>>>>>>>>> l.com> To
>>>>>>>>> Andrew.Updegrove at gesmer.com
>>>>>>>>> 11/09/2007 11:57 cc
>>>>>>>>> AM
>>>>>>>>> Subject
>>>>>>>>> Re: W3C Lead on CDF says
>>>>>>>>> Please respond to OpenDocument Fellowship Position on
>>>>>>>>> Ryan.Singer at gmail CDF Makes No Sense
>>>>>>>>> .com
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>>> _________________
>>>>>>>>> Ryan Singer
>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>>>>>> odf-discuss mailing list
>>>>>>>>> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.com
>>>>>>>>> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> --
>>>>>>>> Gary Edwards
>>>>>>>> da Vinci Corp
>>>>>>>> Redwood City, CA USA 94063
>>>>>>>> (650) 365-0899
>>>>>>>> (650) 888-2268 c.
>>>>>>>> gary.edwards at da-Vinci.us
>>>>>>>> http://da-Vinci.us
>>>>>>>> http://OpenStack.blogspot.com
>>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> odf-discuss mailing list
>>>> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.com
>>>> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>> --
>> J. David Eisenberg http://catcode.com/
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> odf-discuss mailing list
>> odf-discuss at opendocumentfellowship.com
>> http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/mailman/listinfo/odf-discuss
>>
>>
>
>
>
More information about the odf-discuss
mailing list