Comments on: OOXML is OK'd: Why Should You Be Concerned?

By: SaaS Risk Reduction - Open Formats | CloudAve

SaaS Risk Reduction - Open Formats | CloudAve — Wed, 19 Nov 2008 18:35:59 +0000

[...] SeriesRelated articles by ZemantaEnsure Data Portability, Celebrate Document Freedom Day [In Brief]OOXML is OK’d: Why Should You Be Concerned?Open Source is Ideal, Open Formats are CriticalShooting it RAWODF Addins For Microsoft Office [...]

By: Matthew Zablud

Matthew Zablud — Fri, 04 Apr 2008 22:18:37 +0000

I work on the Voices for Innovation program (a Microsoft supported community) and I thought you may be interested to read this post: http://janvandenbeld.blogspot.com/2008/04/hypocrisy.html by Jan van den Beld, Fmr. Secretary General of Ecma International in Geneva.

He notes that even though the standards community overwhelmingly approved Open XML, it seems some players just are not willing to accept their decision. Needless to say, he thinks this is a big insult to the integrity of the thousands of people who worked on this Open XML process.

By: C. Enrique Ortiz

C. Enrique Ortiz — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 16:42:33 +0000

A standard is a true standard as determined by its adoption. Nothing else. I won't be surprised ODF continues its push, and, becomes the real standard.

By: Jon

Jon — Thu, 03 Apr 2008 09:44:06 +0000

ITYM "many IBM employees were rooting for OOXML not to be standardised", because they (IBM Global Services) liked the idea of all those nice fat government contracts that would be attendant upon ripping out MSOffice and installing LotusOffice.

Ironically many of the people around ODF who don't work for IBM - like Gary Edwards or Patrick Durusau - were rooting for OOXML to be standardised too, based on the observation that they filled different needs.

By: John Drinkwater

John Drinkwater — Wed, 02 Apr 2008 23:20:58 +0000

Just one nit: Open Document Format (ODF) is already standardised by ISO, it’s ISO/IEC 26300. Many people were routing for OOXML to be disproved.