Enterprise applications Toolkit

Story: Microsoft: IBM masterminded OOXML failure

• 
• 

Actually its an IBM Witch Hunt and you should get your facts right!

IBM has been sabotaging and blocking this standard from day 1. Why? Why do they not want you to have a choice standards? Why do they want to force an inferior standard down your throat? Why do they think they are best situated to know what is best for your shop?

BTW:

1. At ISO "Fast Track" is the name used to indicate a standard was not home grown, not developed in ISO. Because standards developed in other organizations can also "grow up" and become ISO standards there is a process that enables this - the Fast Track process. ISO does not require that all standards be developed from scratch at ISO, and in fact many are not. OXML as you know was developed at Ecma and therefore would come into ISO under the Fast Track process. Your implication that Ecma and\or MS are trying to rush this through is just plain wrong. OXML is in the ISO Fast Track because it was not developed at ISO, but rather at Ecma.

2. Thousands of pages beceause it is a better, richer standard that enables many features that ODF does not (backward compatibility with billions of existing docs, accessibility, macros, etc). Also thousands of pages because IBM has tried to sabotage and has bombarded the spec with suggestions for "improvements." To their credit Ecma, and its other members like MS have listened and addressed issues, and improved spec., hence the additional pages.

ODF is better.... NOT. But don't take my word for it. Ask IBM (which now implements OXML in 4 of its products), Apple, Google, Novell, and the many OXML implementers. Also check out: http://www.burtongroup.com/Guest/Ccs/WhatsUpDoc.aspx

• 
• 

• 
• 
• 

Full Talkback thread