[odf-discuss] GNOME Foundation Statement on ECMA TC45-M
einfeldt at gmail.com
Sun Nov 25 23:16:13 EST 2007
On Nov 25, 2007 12:01 PM, Daniel <daniel.carrera at zmsl.com> wrote:
> To all:
> What has occurred in this list is not civil discourse,
I agree with Daniel's point above.
Both Pamela Jones and Jeff Waugh and Miguel de Icaza and GNOME and Novell
have all made amazing contributions to the development and proliferation of
FOSS and open standards. Robust debate is a good thing, as Jeff Waugh has
said, we do agree on 99% of the substance as outlined in his 5 point
Can we please continue to state our opinions frankly, but do so with a nicer
IMHO, we have two basic approaches to this issue of ISO for MOOXML. Jody
wants to draw documentation out of Microsoft. Miguel and Jody have a valid
point here. Our FOSS developers will be much more productive (saving time,
money and resources) in pumping out true FOSS code if they can get more info
on how MOOXML works.
It is also true, though, that MOOXML presents everyone but Microsoft a
problem in implementation, and there is good reason to be skeptical of the
benefits of MOOXML as an ISO standard.
Please correct me if I am wrong, but I see a best case scenario here: Jody
engages Microsoft to provide further documentation. Microsoft continues to
disgrace itself with graft in the process of pursuing ISO status. Due to
said graft, Microsoft's ISO bid fails publicly. Microsoft comes out with a
black eye, no ISO status, and has given up data that it previously withheld.
The process of opposing Microsoft's ISO bid has been a painful and divisive
process for us. It will continue to be difficult, time consuming, and
arduous, but we here on this list have the power to make this process
divisive for this community, and to thereby set an example for other FOSS
communities. Let us please do what we can to make this so.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the odf-discuss