Enterprise applications Toolkit

Story: OOXML approval system open to abuse

• 
• 

A typo in the article, and an explanation of the Indian vote.

(quote)
From Ghana, reports of "anti-Microsoft fundamentalism" being used as an argument against technical objections.
(unquote)

Answer: I presume this is a typo - if you are arguing against technical objections to OOXML, then you are pro Microsoft. This should presumably read "pro-Microsoft fundamentalism". This is certainly what has been going on in other countries with blatent ballot stuffing by Microsoft partners who Microsoft has asked to join the voting committees with promises of preferable treatment or payment if they vote for OOXML

(quote)
From India, complaints that "we didn't oppose ODF, so why are you opposing OOXML?".
(unquote)

Answer: Because as the Indian technical committee explained in detail about why they unanimously rejected OOXML, there are serious technical and implementational issues with OOXML. In particular the OOXML spec. contains many references to trade secrets and proprietary patents that only Microsoft or Microsoft licensees will be able to implement. This breaks ISO's rules, and makes OOXML pointless except as a tool for fraudulently marketing it as an open and vendor neutral standard. What is the point of an ISO standard than can only be properly implemented by one company or it's licensees? That is completely contrary to the purpose of ISO standards.

These issues were not present with ODF which is fully described, capable of being implemented in full by anybody including Microsoft without having to take out a license or agreement, and is truly vendor neutral.

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread