[
Lists Home |
Date Index |
Thread Index
]
>[Andrew Watt]
><for_discussion>
>Re-examining some of the recent discussion it seems to me that some
>of the pleas for fully open XML in office suites is simply thinly veiled
special
>pleading for the XML geek lobby.
></for_discussion>
XML's role *can* be to claw back ownership of data from application vendors
and give it back to the users.
Anyone with a large collection of wordprocessor/spreadsheet/presentation
documents out there could do worse
that think about who really *owns* those documents right now.
However, only the syntax of XML is mandatory for compliance. Openness is
optional.
I fear or OfficeML's in that regard. Without documented semantics its just
a bag of
tags in which XML compliance gains you very little. It certainly does not
shift ownership
back to the data creator.
As for open source or open data - I'll take Open Data any day (and no, open
source does not
imply open data). Openness is an attitude - not a syntax.
Open Source/Open Data:
http://www.itworld.com/nl/ebiz_ent/02112003/
Sean
http://seanmcgrath.blogspot.com
|
