On Tuesday 15 April 2008 03:23 pm, Devranjan Das wrote:
not yet. ISO has approved setting up a commitiee for reconciling the differences between the various factions and resolving technical issues.
Dear List
This wikipedia article says that "OOXML" is an open standard. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML
Is that so?
No. It's not a standard. It is a proposed standard which will have to be cleared by various regular ISO committies and the newly formed ones (read my previous mail), before becoming a standard.
OTOH ODF is already an approved standard.
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:55 PM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
No. It's not a standard. It is a proposed standard which will have to be cleared by various regular ISO committies and the newly formed ones (read my previous mail), before becoming a standard.
OTOH ODF is already an approved standard.
AFAIK, nobody has standardized what Open Standard means (and who standardizes the standardizer and all such enigmatic thougths), and nobody has a copyright, business patent or trademark on that phrase. So if Microsoft chooses to call OOXML an Open Standard or Divine Banner or whatever, they can, and their pet bloggers and wikipedia stuffers will proclaim it to be the Truth (TM).
2008/4/15 Nishit Dave stargazer.dave@gmail.com:
AFAIK, nobody has standardized what Open Standard means (and who standardizes the standardizer and all such enigmatic thougths), and nobody has a copyright, business patent or trademark on that phrase. So if Microsoft chooses to call OOXML an Open Standard or Divine Banner or whatever, they can, and their pet bloggers and wikipedia stuffers will proclaim it to be the Truth (TM).
There seemed to be a lot of definitions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard
Does OOXML pass any of these (other than just Microsoft's definition) ?
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 4:12 PM, Praveen A pravi.a@gmail.com wrote:
There seemed to be a lot of definitions http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_standard
Does OOXML pass any of these (other than just Microsoft's definition) ?
Tell that to Microsoft. The rest is empty breast-beating.
btw, this thread has gone off-topic, so I'll call myself a thread Nazi and end it.
On Tuesday 15 April 2008 04:04 pm, Nishit Dave wrote:
On Tue, Apr 15, 2008 at 3:55 PM, jtd jtd@mtnl.net.in wrote:
No. It's not a standard. It is a proposed standard which will have to be cleared by various regular ISO committies and the newly formed ones (read my previous mail), before becoming a standard.
OTOH ODF is already an approved standard.
AFAIK, nobody has standardized what Open Standard means (and who standardizes the standardizer and all such enigmatic thougths), and nobody has a copyright, business patent or trademark on that phrase. So if Microsoft chooses to call OOXML an Open Standard or Divine Banner or whatever, they can, and their pet bloggers and wikipedia stuffers will proclaim it to be the Truth (TM).
True. For now it's not even a standard, never mind any other criteria by which one may choose to classify a standard. Of course M$ will always have their spin on everything, so Open Standard means just that - a non standard open to interpretation by everyone and the mickysoft puppet.
Rgds JTD
-
jtd -
Nishit Dave -
Praveen A