Re: [xml-dev] Microsoft buys the Swedish vote on OOXML?

["Rick Jelliffe" <rjelliffe@allette.com.au>]

Jonathan Robie said:

> One of these new companies was Google, which strongly opposes OOXML, and
> has created the following position paper:
>
> http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/Google%20OOXML%20Q%20%20A.pdf

Doubly interesting in that Google is the world's most prolific generator
(Google Maps to IE) of VML, which is part of the Open XML standard. I
suppose it is much easier to generate documents than to accept them, so
they need a standard for one but not the other...

There is an organized campaign by the fringe of the anti-Open XML people,
fanned by closed source vendors of ODF products, where if they cannot
persuade the various National Bodies that there is no value in having
Office's format open and documented and with clear IP so that everyone can
use it, then they will attack the National Body, ISO and the process. But
don't believe what everything you read: for example, it was claimed that
the Portuguese committee refused to admit IBM and Sun into a meeting
claiming that there was not enough chairs, but in fact IBM and Sun applied
past the deadline to join a fixed-size committee and there were no seats.
Don't be conned.

Jonathan, do you seriously think that people who want a standard should
not be allowed to participate, especially as they find (perhaps to their
surprise or alarm) that there are so many people trying to block it? Or do
you believe that it is legitimate to join a standards committee with the
goal of blocking a standard that other people need (i.e., to use the
standards process to create a cartel: the US at least has strong
anti-trust laws against this.)?

If you don't like ISO C# as a language, don't use it. Use ISO C++, or ISO
Common LISP, or ISO Pascal, or ISO FORTRAN, or ISO ADA, or ISO Eiffel. But
an ISO C# person should not try to block developments in ISO C++ just
because it is not their liking, or because it goes against their corporate
interests.

Cheers
Rick Jelliffe

P.S. For an update on the current approval process, see
http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2007/08/last_days_for_office_open_xml.html

P.P.S. For my comments on why a "No with Comments" vote (conditional
approval) is a good thing, see
http://www.oreillynet.com/xml/blog/2007/08/my_recommendation_on_office_op.html