Fw: [odf-discuss] Microsoft's implementation of ODF 1.1

[robert_weir at us.ibm.com]

odf-discuss-bounces at opendocumentfellowship.com wrote on 01/05/2009 
04:32:17 PM:

>Standards are about uniformity, not about product differentiation. ODF
>and OOXML are not true standards precisely because do not specify all
>characteristics of an identifiable product or group of products only
>in mandatory "must" or "must not" terms.

Hi Paul, I think the above is at the core of your argument.  So I 
understand your position perfectly, are you asserting that a standard is 
only permitted to include mandatory requirements, e.g., those expressed by 
"shall" and "shall not" in ISO practice, or "must" and "must not" in IETF 
practice?  Further, are you asserting that a standard that includes even a 
single optional requirement or recommendation, e.g., a "should" or "should 
not" in ISO practice, or expresses an implementation option, e.g., "may" 
in ISO practice, is not a "real standard", or is an unlawful standard, or 
is a standard that may not be specified as a requirement for government 
procurement?

Regards,

-Rob