A Look At MS's MA Talking Points
tbray writes "It may not be a Halloween Document, but one of the lobby groups in the thick of the Massachusetts office-doc standardization fray passed me 'The Other Side's Talking Points', so I've published (and slightly deconstructed) them with a barnyard-animal picture." From the article: "The direction toward interoperability using XML data standards is clearly a good one. However, limiting the document formats to the OpenOffice format is unnecessary, unfair and gives preferential treatment for specific vendor products, and prohibits others. The proposed approach and process for use of XML data is quite open to multiple standards, yet the proposed standard for documents is quite narrow, preferential, and may not enable optimal use of the data-centric standards."
There are less costly, less limiting, non-preferential policy options to achieve the same goals.
However, Microsoft is as unsure as you what these options are; they certainly aren't their products.
Okay than.... which open XML data standard with accompanying open-source software to use it do you suggest the state of Massachusetts start looking at?
Silicon & Charybdis McLuhan Kildall Papert Kay
I think they're more likely to get hired by Google than fired by Microsoft.
The secret to creativity is knowing how to hide your sources. - Albert Einstein
Ballmer: Just tell me it's not Open Office. It's not Open Office, is it?
Commonwealth of Massachusetts: Yes.
(chair flies through air) CRASH....
Ballmer: I WILL KILL MOTHERFUCING OPEN OFFICE! WordPerfect tried to get me, but I fucked them one good. I will fucking kill Open Office.
http://www.thebricktestament.com/the_law/when_to_
Every time you post an article like this, Ballmer kills a chair.
Please, think of the chairs!
Notepad.
It doesn't get any more interoperable, does it? Well, except that CR+LF issue, but that's all Unix's fault! ;)