Skip to main content

Close
Get the best research tool on the web today,and free!
Connect with people with common interests!
Play Webslides

Gary Edwards's Bookmarks tagged brm   View Popular

You are here: Diigo Home > Gary Edwards's Bookmarks

Expand All 1 - 8 of 8
1Expand

Once More unto the Breach: Microsoft Discusses Open Standards (versus Open Source Software)

1Expand

Microsoft's OOXML limps through ISO meeting - ZDNet UK

Tags: BRM, Ecma, Geneva, ISO, OASIS, odf, ooxml on 2008-03-05 -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromnews.zdnet.co.uk

1Expand

Open Malaysia: Geneva, Day Five

1Expand

ODF and OOXML are standards in name only - Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary' - Talkback at ZDNet UK

1Expand

Denmark: OOXML vote won't affect public sector. ODF is too costly! | InfoWorld

1Expand

A Savage Journey … ODF at the OOXML BRM « A Frantic Opposition

1Expand

Word of recognition from an unexpected side: ODF editor Patrick Durusau supports OOXML - ISO effort

<p>Patrick Durusau, the OASIS ODF editor has written an open letter praising the OOXML standardization effort at Ecma and ISO. Patrick is a long time member of ISO JTCS1, currently serving as the ODF editor for both ISO and OASIS ODF efforts. That his endorsement of OOXML comes on the eve of the critically important February BRM is beyond incredible. </p>

<p>Jesper offers this quote which i think adequately summarizes Patrick's endorsement:</p>

<p>The OpenXML project has made a large amount of progress in terms of the openness of its evelopment. Objections that do not recognize that are focusing on what they want to see and not what is actually happening with OpenXML"</p>

Tags: BRM, Durusau, ISO, OASIS, odf, officeopenxml, ooxml, opendocument, openxml on 2008-02-07 -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromidippedut.dk

ODF Alliance on the Microsoft Disposition of ISO Comments on OOXML

<p>The ever audacious and prevaricating lobbyist group known as the ODF Alliance has posted their critique of Ecma's (Microsoft's) proposed disposition of ISO comments rejecting OOXML. The critique's appeal to ignorance is breath-taking in scope. E.g., whilst slamming DIS-29500 on the subject of interoperability, the same document pushes for harmonization using the following argument:</p>

<p><i>"Harmonization starts from looking at where the two formats overlap – and there is a significant, perhaps 90 percent or more, area where OOXML and ODF do overlap – and expressing this functional overlap identically. This common functionality between ODF and OOXML would also include a common extensibility mechanism. The remaining 10 percent of the functionality, where these standards do not overlap, would represent the focus of the harmonization effort. That portion of it which represents a widespread need could be brought into the core of ODF. That remaining portion which only serves one vendor's needs, such as flags for deprecated legacy formatting options, could be represented using the common extensibility mechanism."</i></p>

<p>And precisely how do vendor-specific extensions aid interoperability, particularly when the proposed "harmonization" does not require profiles and an interoperability framework?</p>

Tags: brm, odf, odf-alliance, ooxml, opendocument, openxml on 2008-01-30 -All Annotations (0) -About

more fromwww.odfalliance.org

1 - 8 of 8
List 20 50 100

Notation: * = Private bookmark and comment| = Clipping [?] | = Public highlight [?]