What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
Forum » News / Front-page » What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
started by: zoobabzoobab
on: 1183037239|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
number of posts: 5
rss icon RSS: new posts
summary:
ECMA (essentially a Microsoft proxy) has published a document to counter all the contradictions submitted by countries against the Fast Track. This document can be seen as the core of the counter-arguments by Microsoft to convince National Bodies that OOXML is a good thing. A very informative document on which arguments Microsoft will use to discuss with other stakehoders during the forthcoming meetings.
unfold all | fold all | +more options
fold
What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
zoobabzoobab 1183037239|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

The document is here: http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/Ecma%20responses.pdf (local copy).

I will provide comments on the weak points of the Microsoft's defense, and I encourage you to do the same.

reply | options
unfold What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours? by zoobabzoobab, 1183037239|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
fold
Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
Anonymous (80.41.230.10) 1183056992|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

The argument that there are multiple standards is weak in my opinion. ECMA describes how different standards can be used for different activities (preparing, publishing and archiving). In this case the standards do not compete. However, they do not provide an example where ODF and OOXML are _both_ used in the progress of handling a document. In fact, given the process that ECMA describes: preparing a document in OOXML, publishing it as HTML and archiving it as PDF, it is hard to imagine a step where ODF is used that does not _replace_ OOXML. Therefore I think that the standards do in fact compete.

reply | options
unfold Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours? by Anonymous (80.41.230.10), 1183056992|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
fold
Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
Anonymous (83.199.93.70) 1184103522|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

Thanks for your ECMA's point of view.
I never suspected that IBM, Mozilla and Gnome foundations were Microsoft's supporters :-)

Xavier, French citizen.
And please, don't take care about my IP address, my provider renews it each day…

reply | options
unfold Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours? by Anonymous (83.199.93.70), 1184103522|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
fold
Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
Anonymous (190.136.226.63) 1183078790|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

this article is a response to the ECMA-responses to contradictions.

http://www.freesoftwaremagazine.com/node/2110

It worths a reading.

reply | options
unfold Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours? by Anonymous (190.136.226.63), 1183078790|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
fold
Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours?
Anonymous (90.184.15.189) 1184251646|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover

This just in from someone who partipated in national NB meeting:
M$:"Getting an XML specification for a product used so extensively is an advantage, this argument must be acknowledged as a valid argument for approving standard even if standard is less than perfect."

I am inclined to say BS! Disadvantage of fragmentation between two competing standards/markets, thus hindering compitition is so much more important that this becomes complete nonsense. You can not possibly make such a claim without considdering disadvantages and alternatives, Microsoft could implement ODF support and participate in further development of standard to achieve 100 document fidelity for converting legacy document if that is even important.

reply | options
unfold Re: What are the Microsoft's arguments to defeat ours? by Anonymous (90.184.15.189), 1184251646|%e %b %Y, %H:%M %Z|agohover
new post