[odf-discuss] GNOME Foundation Statement on ECMA TC45-M
ian.lynch at zmsl.com
Mon Nov 26 03:57:03 EST 2007
On Mon, 2007-11-26 at 11:06 +1100, Jeff Waugh wrote:
> Well, there are a couple of answers to this:
> a) We're not "for" two or more standards. We're not "for" OOXML as an ISO
> standard. That should be clear from our statement.
You seem to be missing the point. It's perception that matters. The fact
that you are having to try and justify your position here simply
demonstrates that is the issue.
> b) We're not "for" a "single ISO standard", at least in the terms demanded
> by posters on this list. Now, this bears some explaining:
> Firstly, we're 100% behind ODF, and think that's the best opportunity
> for industry and government to create a real collaborative standard
> that will benefit everyone. That should be clear from our statement.
> We don't believe that it is in our best interests to condemn OOXML on
> the basis that there should be "only one standard". This is a political
Precisely. Learn the politics. In the end it's just as important as the
> not related to the ISO rules or process, and not useful to us
> in the future. We're not going to use short-term attacks that will have
> a negative impact on us in the future.
> You're likely to disagree with that. That's okay. But when we start
> pitching, say, an unencumbered, Open and Free video codec to ISO (which
> would be a massive win for Freedom), be aware that the "only one
> standard" argument would *massively* hurt us in that mission. An ISO
> standard for video already exists, and it's horrifyingly encumbered.
Different arena. Win one battle at a time.
> OOXML should be defeated on technical grounds, according to the ISO process.
> Every time we make political arguments, that *helps* Microsoft's mission, no
> matter how political we know the entire thing really is.
If you think we can avoid engaging M$ politically I think you are very
much mistaken. M$ needs defeating on the principle of freedom and that
is a political issue. Even if OOXML was technically superior to ODF I'd
vote for ODF because of the freedom issue. Technicalities can be fixed
if there is a will, lock-in is much more difficult.
> I hope you consider these issues carefully,
> I offer them very much from the
> perspective of someone dedicated to Software Freedom, who doesn't have any
> interest in the success of Microsoft or OOXML.
I don't doubt it. I'm just questioning a strategy that seems to have
caused massive upheaval in the community, whatever the intention.
New QCA Accredited IT Qualifications
You have received this email from the following company: The Learning
Machine Limited, Reg Office, 36 Ashby Road, Tamworth, Staffordshire, B79
8AQ. Reg No: 05560797, Registered in England and Wales.
More information about the odf-discuss