Slashdot Mirror
ISO Calls For OOXML Ceasefire
In response to the continued attacks on Microsoft's OOXML standard, the International Organization for Standardization (ISO) has called for a ceasefire. "Last week the ISO committee in charge of document standards, SC 34, met in Oslo to discuss the way forward for OOXML and ODF. The plenary session was marked by protests outside, largely carried out by delegates from a nearby open-source conference. The protesters were calling for OOXML to be withdrawn from ISO standardization -- something that could theoretically happen if a national standards body were to protest against its own vote within the next month or two."
We the undersigned wish to make it clear that the ISO fucked up and should never have made OOXML a standard, and that we will continue to attack ISO until it is revoked. Furthermore, we believe that this is for the ISO's own good, because allowing this result of obvious corruption to remain can only harm ISO's credibility as a standards organization. We also wish to remind the ISO that these so-called "personal attacks" have only become necessary in the first place because our technical objections have been entirely ignored. Finally, we note that the resolution to create working groups to maintain OOXML and "harmonize" it with ODF was stupid, because neither group would be necessary in the first place if the redundant, conflicting, and poorly-designed OOXML hadn't been approved in the first place!
"[Regarding the 'cloud,'] ownership was what made America different than Russia." -- Woz
Why is that even an issue? ODF passed, it's a clear and well-defined standard that nobody has a problem with and nobody had to be bribed to support.
The only issue is that cluster-fuck of submarine proprietary technology posing as an open standard called OOXML.
Keep OOXML, or reject that POS like they should have to begin with, the only effect that has on ODF is in the purchasing decisions that may be swayed by MS also having a "standard".
The enemies of Democracy are
A cease fire is when both sides agree to stop shooting. So is ISO saying they will agree to stop attacking us? I didn't even notice ISO was attacking me.
They deserve to be taken to the woodshed for a good spanking.
The ONLY ones who will benefit from a "cease-fire" are the ones who have the criticism coming to them. Let them admit they screwed up, that the processes behind their handling of MSOOXML are fatally flawed, and that a redo is necessary to preserve^Wrestore the integrity of ISO.
Kevin Smith on Prince
In my opinion, an easier way to counter this Microsoft OOXML standard is to urge respective governments to avoid it and not to touch it even with a 10 foot pole. That way, alternative formats will take route. Isn't this easier?
Screw the Ceasefire, time to employ Guerrilla Warfare
Agent K: A *person* is smart. People are dumb, stupid, panicky animals, and you know it.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
Reduce, reuse, cycle
the ISO is corrupted. MSFT fscked up the ISO and it is permanently damaged. Germany, Norway, Poland, and several other countries are looking into voting irregularities in the OOXML vote. For that fact alone the OOXML should have failed to pass pending the outcome of those investigations.
right now there are several MSFT P member countries that will no longer vote on anything because they are no longer being paid by MSFT to work with the ISO. These countries are deadlocking other standards and forcing them to fail because they refuse to vote on anything not OOXML. Those countries should have their votes discarded until they start attended and voting on things other than OOXML.
So why should the attacks stop? Has the corruption stopped yet?
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
Ask not what you can do for your country. Ask what your country did to you
Does this mean that Norway and Great Britain haven't submitted their appeals yet? I believe both technical committees stated they would appeal. Does anyone know the status of them?
Of course, I'm sure the US Government will select that standard - remember, I did ask, what sane entity would choose such a horrible standard.
This may put Microsoft back in the running with governmental and other organizations, but I see it rather like getting a plow horse qualified to run in a horse race. Okay, there may be some profit in it for Microsoft, but even with ISO validation would you consider adopting a standard which even the author can neither explain nor understand? This pony'll go off at 99:1 every time, IMHO.
From the Article:
"Another ad hoc group will also become operational in three months' time, collecting reports of "possible editorial or technical defects" in OOXML from national standards bodies, "liaison organisations" and the general public."
Shouldn't they have done that BEFORE making it a "standard"?
You are either woefully ignorant of MS' business history or you have a check in you back pocket with Bill's signature.
MS has done a few things for the greater good but this action is one that will destroy MS' reputation in Joe users' mind when it get out to mainstream news.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
"Doing everything right the first time" in this context means adopting ODF, not pushing forward your own clusterfuck of a "standard".
http://outcampaign.org/
If they throw out OOXML as a standard, does that mean all those people have to give Microsoft back all that money?
Why would they cause a ceasefire if people are concerned? Instead, shouldn't they encourage people to voice their opinions and let them know that they're hearing them? They're a standards organization that affects the world, isn't this stuff important?
Twinstiq, game news
I know the Slashdot crowd didn't start caring about ISO until OOXML hit SC34 but I have other issues with ISO. SC29/WG11 (More commonly known as MPEG) is notoriously closed off. All their proposed work for consideration is closed off from public scrutiny until after it has been accepted and published. Reference software updates are only made available to committee members while the rest of us have to wait for a version to be signed off as a Corrigendum/Addendum and then sit for a year as all the i's are dotted and t's are crossed in the general body (why can't non controversial reference software bugfixes get fast-tracked the same way OOXML was?). When people come to MPEG industry forum technical list (Mp4-tech) for clarification they are often referred secret documents and reference software that they have no way of getting. Furthermore their document interchange format is .doc not ODF or OOXML.
No, what you just wrote does not make you seem witty, funny or smart. People are seriously concerned about OOXML, and someone here just takes potty shots? If you don't know what the issues are about, go find out before shooting off your keyboard.
While probably true, it does not obviate the fact that they most certainly did many wrong things while trying to push through a "standard".
The fact that some will complain no matter what you do doesn't give you the right to do wrong.
Code or be coded.
Sadly, I think you underestimate the apathy of the public over this stuff.
Joe user will hear the words "ISO Standard", "voting" and decide they neither know nor care WTF this is all about. The mainstream news will know this, and won't both reporting it.
Us in tech will find yet another reason to loathe Microsoft and their business practices, but to the average user, they simply will not care about this. You can't easily make this an issue people will understand why they should care about. It's so far off their radar as to be non-existent.
Cheers
Lost at C:>. Found at C.
WTF is ISO playing at when they take something that CANNOT be said to be a "reasonable standard" and still APPROVE it as an ISO Standard?
Fuck that! ISO is supposed to approve STANDARDS. Not approve crap and then try to turn it into a "reasonable standard".
ISO sold out and is now trying to play the victim in this.
Lets see,
number of companies that can make a format that works with ODF (aka compete): infinite
number of companies that can make a format that works with OOXML (aka compete): 0.
Let alone global trade rules that having overlap in standards doesn't allow, this will not pass over smoothly or easily.
So how much does MS pay you? I admit I'd take the cash too but I'd openly admit that I am, if that were the case.
The ISO process to fast track and/or approve OOXML has been fought hard by technical people on the basis of technical deficiencies.
OOXML is *NOT* worthy of ISO approval. Any rational review of the "standard," will show that it is incomplete, non-specific, and completely worthless as a blue print on how to implement a document reader for a document.
How this got approved is clearly worth a corruption investigation. It calls into question the integrity of the people and organization that approved it.
It is nothing less than an attempt to eliminate the ability to share documents without paying Microsoft and maintain Microsoft's monopoly. The very thing the ISO standard is supposed to fight. It is criminal that these bastards have subverted the standards process as they did.
Calling for the end of "Personal attacks" is nothing more than saying "fuck you." Public statements questioning the motives and integrity of these people is the only ration course of action given what they have done. They deserve every last bit of it. Jailtime if we can find a law to fit the crime.
ISO got gamed, ganked and pwned. At this point, Microsoft are teabagging their corpse.
What ISO need to do right now is to grow a pair and admit that they're gagging on sweaty Ballmer-balls, rather than putting their fingers in their ears and going "La la la, the process is perfect, la la la, there's nothing wrong."
I doubt you'd find any unbiased informed observer that believes them, although I'm sure you'd find a few who would happily say that in return for a free upgrade of their corporate Office installs. The emperor has no clothes, no matter how many procedural boxes they tick off to try to hide their ding-a-ling dangling in the wind.
If you were blocking sigs, you wouldn't have to read this.
ideology has nothing to do with it.
Nobody but MS can implement this standard.
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
If OOXML was a clean standard that could be implenmented freely then i woud stop complaining about it.
unfortunately it isn't. It is patent encumbered, limited, and reverse engineering the sections that say do like word 95, or keep dates like lotus123 version 2, is a problem.
From the standard alone you should be able to recreate an OOXML document. but it is impossible to fully implement.
to clean up OOXML to make it so that other developers can use it will take more work than simply using ODF, or even upgrading ODF to support new features will.
i thought once I was found, but it was only a dream.
There's insults and then there's insults. There's outrages and then there's outrages. It's like the moment in a grade school hallway where you don't even see it and there's a sense something has happened, a thrill rippling through the crowd of kids. A circle forms and there's two antagonists. You know that someone has done something, something big, something that cannot be shrugged off. Either the injured party must stand up and fight, even in the face of a serious thrashing, or he must submit and be labeled a bitch. Depending on the stature of the injured party, accepting bitch status can cement the bully's prestige and make all other resistance seem futile while even a lost fight can stiffen the resolve of the other kids and make them refuse to back down.
That's all this shit boils down to really, schoolyard power struggles. The only difference, when Microsoft is playing for all the marbles, they're going to take a hell of a lot more than just your marbles if they win.
So, is this the offense that sparks the rebellion or will it be accepted without complaint, confirming Microsoft's ability to do whatever the hell they want for there shall be no consequences?
Kwisatz Haderach
Sell the spice to CHOAM
This Mahdi took Shaddam's Throne
You want to take the bribe AND keep your reputation? Methinks not. That's like wanting the great sex AND keep your virginity. Ain't gonna happen. Take you big fat bribe and go choke on an umbrella drink somewhere and STFU.
In terms of constructive action: I'd like to write to the ISO regarding my views on this matter, urging that the matter be reconsidered.
Does anyone have the contact information for the appropriate body at the ISO?
In the contrary. It's no longer about just OOXML.
In addition to targeting OOXML, we ought to start targeting the ISO as a whole.
This organization, theoretically being in charge for the Standardization of a thousand matters, has knowingly let its own standards drop to an abysmal low level.
It is time now to question the qualification of the ISO as such severely and, possibly, get rid of it, replacing it by an impartial and responsible institution.
then get out of the kitchen. ISO needs nerds with spines.
ISO created their own mess that allowed the vote to be packed for OOXML. Now, they can suffer for their stupidity and lack of foresight.
In any case, the call for a cease fire should energize those that are making ISO sweat. It is obviously working and exposing the fact that ISO can be bought.
The only place for ISO now is history as they have allowed MS to soil their reputation. No one can trust them to do the right thing. Once a dog bites a person, we destroy it because it has demonstrated the propensity to attack a human. ISO has exposed its political side and there is no reason to not think that ISO will not be hijacked in the future.
Fun to Hate MS, but OOXML is needed...
There is no document standard that properly handles advanced properties and content.
I will again, mention one TINY item that ODF skips and ONLY OOXML supports completely, and it is INK.
I know everyone here seems to 'know it all' but there are billions of dollars in the medical industry that have applications built on INK technology and data. What happens to all these documents, and the exchange of these documents if INK is not preserved?
We could demand all government to not use OOXML, but when medical information that contains INK technology is submited to the government, the data will be lost or reduced to an image at best.
And the medical industry is just one example, although one of the biggest adopters of handwritten and Ink technologies.
So if we demand our governments to not use OOXML, or we demand that OOXML is killed, do you really feel comfortable with the medical industry having to convert and destroy the Ink format? There are billions of documents with Ink technology used in them, and this includes everything from Doctor's notes, to even signature authorizations.
I can't believe that SlashDot readers hate MS so much they are willing to kill technology and destroy technology in use. Is this really in YOUR best interest?
Just to clarify Ink for people. It is NOT just an image, Ink contains a lot of data from the stokes, direction, speed, pressure, as well as the textual equivalent of the Ink written. Which all would be lost when trying to convert it to an Image. Additionally, the 'richness' of Ink technology is why Microsoft TabletPCs and Vista with built in Ink support is important for industries like medical, as well as why it works so well.
You can even do Ink in web pages, but yet everyone here wants to shove this technology in the can so we can rally around a format that has no knowledge of Ink? How can people really justify this?
Microsoft research has put more money and time in making Ink work and work well by staying in native 'Ink' formats and working like existing words, as well as holding the Ink data even when converting the handwriting to text.
As for people that thinks Ink sucks or is a toy technology, go to YouTube and search for Ink, there are several demonstrations of MS Ink technology and even some comparisons of how well it works even for unreadable handwriting because it uses the stokes, pressure, to determine the word instead of the image the Ink produces.
(And if anyone wants to go 'Apple has Ink', also look at the YouTube videos of how Apple's Ink technology works in comparison to MS's technology. Apple's Ink uses an Image format and Image based recognition, and will never touch the recognition levels of MS's technology until they also handle Ink like MS's technology does.)
With my little argument of how important Ink is and a format to hold Ink is, do you really think just based on Ink, that we throw out all the Ink format just because we are paranoid or hate MS?
Now what if we up the conversation of other media formats supported and contained in OOXML, like sound notes (with textual recognition) to advanced animation or Video formats that OOXML provides support for. Then what about advanced engineering math and functions OOXML supports, that a large portion of many industries use and rely on?
In contrast ODF doesn't even touch 50% of today's document technologies, let alone have native support for upcoming and future technologies. OOXML not only defines today's document technologies, but has built in support for emergining technologies and has detailed specifications for adding new technologies in the future that are far more elegant than a reference point and freaking Zip file with the content like you get with ODF.
If you kill OOXML, you will cripple the medical industry at the very least, besides sending other industries back to the early 90s in terms of document features. Scientists and engineers will love having to go back to creating formulas and equations in non-natural formats or rasterize them in their documents. BRILLIANT, AYE?
Why should we cease fire?
It was W.R.O.N.G. to add another standard when the ISO already approved ODF. ISO had the once in a lifetime chanceto do something for humanity...but instead they F.U.C.K.E.D. up and let the money overrule them.
We will stop when:
1) OOXML's standardization is revoked
2) When the ISO C.H.A.N.G.E.S their process to make sure this never, and ever happens again.
We must prevail
Forgetting for awhile the obvious play on words when naming OOXML. How can both OOXML and ODF exist? They seem to be analogous to two trees planted in the same area, competing for resources. OOXML, coming from Microsoft, regardless of its flaws, has quite a head start and will simply kill off ODF. It isn't as if they both start on the same footing and so the better standard would win.
"Thanks for all the money you paid to us. We've used it to buy off ISO among other things" -Microsoft
Is when it is dead!
ccalam - acoustic versions of new songs.
So, what personal attacks are there? Can someone point to an example? Certainly, many think that the ISO is broken, Microsoft is corrupt, and suspect that there was some serious fraud happening at some level but none of these are personal attacks. They're legitimate complaints about major organisations. So who is this person being attacked?
ISO is just digging themselves into a deeper hole. Any chance they had of redeeming themselves as a standards body was lost when the joke of OOXML was "approved". They are no longer a reputable standards body, they are just yet another bureaucratic bought and paid for rubber stamp. They will find that their "standards" no longer have any meaning in the real world...in fact they are being replaced as we speak. The official launch hasn't happened yet (but coming very soon): http://www.certifiedopen.com/
Here is what I see as the real issue.
Many jurisdictions are adopting regulations that documents be stored in open-standard formats. There are multiple reasons for this, including the long-term archival accessibility of the data.
This was obviously threatening to Microsoft. It would be difficult on technical grounds to map between Microsoft's internal formats and a true open standard such as ODF. If Microsoft's products can't read and write in true open standard formats, then government bodies have no choice but to use a non-Microsoft product to comply with the open-standards requirement, which means lost sales for Microsoft.
By forcing thru their proprietary format as a "standard", Microsoft can now truthfully state that their file formats satisfy the legal requirement for government documents to be stored in open-standard formats.
Very clever indeed.
When products and services meet our expectations, we tend to take this for granted and be unaware of the role of standards. However, when standards are absent, we soon notice. We soon care when products turn out to be of poor quality, do not fit, are incompatible with equipment that we already have, are unreliable or dangerous.
When products, systems, machinery and devices work well and safely, it is often because they meet standards. And the organization responsible for many thousands of the standards which benefit the world is ISO.
Comment removed based on user account deletion
You're right: there aren't any personal attacks here. This isn't about Microsoft, it's about the process. The easy manipulability of ISO's standards voting process is now open to scrutiny. This plea represents their shock that so many people were paying attention.
Personally I think Office Open XML becoming Open XML could lead to good things, assuming the standards body improves it over time and that we can get Microsoft to implement it faithfully. (I know, I know: big assumption.) But optimism aside, there's nothing wrong with criticizing the process and conducting an investigation into it. That concern goes way beyond Microsoft. So let's keep shining the light of accountability on this fiasco. If they're a genuine, open standards body they should welcome this.
interesting and plausible. can you back this up?
For screwing up the ISO and reaffirming that all you give a fuck about is money. We should be attacking Microsoft too for being such a corrupt company. Obviously they dont care in the least about IT or computing unless they can make a buck.
I like my document format better anyways. Its called UTF-8. Its cross platform, super speedy, and incredibly small in size XD
If Microsoft wants to convince me that their standard is worthwhile, here's what they can do: have two teams, working completely independently with just the standard document as a guide, be able to create compatible implementations. This is the process the IETF uses before a Proposed Standard can become a Draft Standard (as outlined in RFC2026).
Yes, it would take years for two teams to implement a 6000+ page standards doc, only to have them come back and ask what "autoSpaceLikeWord95" is supposed to mean. That alone should tell us a lot about the quality of the standard.
Not a typewriter
"OOXML not only defines today's document technologies, but has built in support for emergining technologies and has detailed specifications for adding new technologies in the future that are far more elegant than a reference point and freaking Zip file with the content like you get with ODF."
This was almost taken seriously until I saw this point... OOXML is a zip file too. Do your homework better, astroturfer.
ODF allows for extensions as well, you know.
The problem as I see it is that the only ones with standing to appeal are the national standards organizations. The same organizations that in many cases overruled the technical committees (sp?). Of course they are not going to appeal their own decision! This makes the appeals process useless... or am I missing something?
Everywhere I look I see articles complaining about how bad everything is because well, its bad. I can hardly find any pages which give me some technical insights as to why this is all bad.
I get a strong feeling that many people are against OOXML because well, its MS' doing and as we all know MS is evil. Or would it be because they simply don't want to bother implementing OOXML support for their applications because its too much work?. Another major difference between the two; one is 600 pages, the other 6000. And once more it continues to give more comments about how stupid it was to be able and review 6000 pages in such short time.
Sure, but what about the exact technical differences?
number of companies that can make a format that works with ODF (aka compete): infinite
Complete fantasy.
Take complex documents from one ODF supporting editor to another. OO.o, Symphony, Kwhatever, Gwhatever, iWhatever. Watch the formatting change, disappear and get corrupted.
In some perfect world an infinite company could come up with an ideal implementation.
In the ACTUAL world, the most dependable way to transfer a document between 2 different ODF editors is to export it as a
see here for a piece at ConsortiumInfo on the matter...
----
Here is how the eleven countries that upgraded from O to P membership in the months (and often just days) before the OOXML voting period closed on OOXML, and also whether or not they voted in the more recent ballot (all data is from Rick's analysis of the voting record):
Upgrades that voted to adopt OOXML and didn't vote later: 7
(Cote dIvoire, Cyprus, Lebanon, Malta, Pakistan, Turkey, Venezuela)
Upgrades that abstained on OOXML and didn't vote later: 1
(Trinidad and Tobago)
Upgrades that voted against OOXML and didn't vote later: 0
That is like launching ICBM's and as soon as they detonate, calling for a ceasefire.
NO, I will only stop when the corrupt organization that is ISO is dead, or remedies the wrongs, and makes sure they cannot happen again!
Comment removed based on user account deletion
ive watch them sabotage many a good language {vrml and x3d} in the past with their red tape and rhetoric
meanwhile the organizations in charge of interfacing with the iso just keep complaining about no money and no support of the community, mostly because the communities move on to more productive interests
their need for process and committee basically squelching and stifling all innovation in the process
im not surprised this has dragged on for soooo long
why cant we all just use paperclip???
back in the day we didnt have no old school
If they really want an OOXML "Ceasefire", then they should offer a compromise with the opponents of OOXML.
Namely: revoke the standard and allow it to continue to be reworked.
I doubt anti-OOXML activists would take issue with letting OOXML be re-evaluated a year or two fromnow. We would even let the ISO get away with NOT re-evaluating its processes that allowed brand-spanking new member countries to vote with as much power as long standing members.
In the meantime, Microsoft (and whoever else is interested) can address the technical issues with OOXML and revise the specification so that it meets the communities requirements for openness.
At the same time, I think it is accurate to say that there are "features" that customers require in OOXML that are not in any approved ISO standards (for instance, I believe OOXML has collaboration features, whereas ODF does not). Thus, the anti-OOXML community might attempt to code an "Open" standard which addresses those features. Call it the "ODF Extension" and empower it to combined with the original ODF standard to give an identical set of features as are specified in OOXML. If this were achieved and OOXML truly would not bring any added value to the Office/Productivity software standard, then it could officially be flushed down the toilet.
That said, there cannot be a "Ceasefire" as long as OOXML is still recognized as a Standard...
Support the 30 Hour Work Week!!!
Because the next step is to decommission ODF. Read the writing on the wall; you have two standards that overlap, and one company that is willing to push any amount of money to get their way. We might yet see Microsoft "agreeing" with its detractors that one standard is better than two--and then you can logically extrapolate from that what their next move will be.
Another version reads: "Two standards good, One standard better!"
Or perhaps summed up clearest: "Embrace, extend, extinguish."
- Roey
Comment removed based on user account deletion
ISO sells out and countenances a corrupt process about which it had ample warning.
ISO's name becomes dirt among those who care for standards.
Some of the people ticked off at the destruction of this former standards body hold a public protest.
ISO does not like the resulting bad publicity.
I will say this once, ISO, so listen closely. Once a standards body loses the confidence of the people it is supposed to serve, it is terminal, unless it backtracks and expunges the reason for the loss of confidence. Chew on that. Get back to us once you have rediscovered your spine.
That makes too much sense. Now I'm really depressed. :(
The enemies of Democracy are
The scary thing is this is a direct excerpt from the OOXML docs.
Couldn't agree more. When a thief comes into your home and steals everything you have, it really doesn't make sense to do a cease fire. You take back what belongs to you....what Microsoft has stolen....
Now the thief may try to appeal for you to be reasonable by "splitting the difference" (i.e. respect ODF if OOXML is respected), but you're still getting a raw deal, even if the thief appears to be "generous" by giving you 80% and taking only 20%.
We need to call a spade a spade and this spade needs to be leveled on the head of the thief and all the thief's henchmen until they give the world back what it deserves.
Someone needs to Rickroll the ISO committee responsible.
The only thing I find moronic here is the insinuation that a child, which is the result of a rape, is somehow predestined to become evil.
How right you are. But maybe a "Dateline" expose would catch their attention. Oh, wait a minute. That show is produced and carried by (MS)NBC, so that ain't gonna happen. Hey "60 Minutes," how 'bout it?
A cynic is a man who, when he smells flowers, looks around for a coffin. -H. L. Mencken
Yes
...that ISO has a history of being mostly stupid then -> "MPEG is a standard and yet is extremely heavily encumbered with patents."..they should never approve any standard that has patents like that in it. Just because. Unless the patents are then put into the public domain free and clear and unencumbered. Anything else is just kowtowing to some corporation/cartel and their attempts at vendor lockin as a "standard".
I say it is time to just abandon ISO, no longer useful. OOXML is just so glaringly and obviously lame that it stands out now, and they fully deserve all the criticism they are getting. They make US "blackbox voting" look scrupulously fair and honest.
Why wasn't it a "reasonable standard" when it was SUBMITTED?
That is spelled out in detail in the standards doc. Time for you to buy some new FUD.
Respect is earned.
This is not a matter of "strongly disagree" -- in about ten minutes, I was able to explain to my mother why OOXML is not particularly open, and not feasible to implement by third-parties -- and thus should not be a standard. Yes, my mother understands this, but the ISO doesn't.
Even disregarding that -- even assuming that's what they meant by "strongly disagree" -- Microsoft has thoroughly gamed the process, something which, again, is easy to see.
All of which means that personal attacks are entirely justified -- but it looks as though there weren't any:
That's right -- a protest.
In what way is a protest a "personal attack"? It is an attack against your organization, or against your working group -- it is not an attack against you, personally, and it is not an attack against anything about you other than that you passed a standard which, to put it kindly, is obviously incomplete and broken.
Speaking of which -- you brought this on yourselves. You passed a standard which is obviously incomplete and broken -- or, in mrchaotica's words, it is redundant, conflicting, and poorly-designed. You absolutely deserve every single flame, troll, protest, and dirty look that you get. I, and others like me, are going to do our best to make it at least as unpleasant for you to pass OOXML, as Microsoft would endeavor to make it unpleasant for you to not pass OOXML.
Don't thank God, thank a doctor!
There is a strong argument to be made that the ISO processes are hale and hearty, but that the persons who were using them were not sound. The personal attacks may well be justified.
It was the decisions of persons who put OOXML on the fast track, and otherwise let things get so badly screwed up. Perhaps they should be held accountable for their actions. That kind of accountability is central to the ISO standards governing quality control of processes.
But why is it even there? It makes no sense for anyone who doesn't have the backward compatibility issues that Microsoft has. A standard should be for everyone, not just one company.
Not a typewriter
You could cram any more genitalia references into your post?
you had me at #!
I agree. However, only if ODF is kicked back for the same thing. Both standards are clearly difficult to impossible to implement (hence no perfect implementations of EITHER exist).
It could be an interesting experiment. And while they're at it, they can do something about that bollocks RAND licensing thing.
For a site about things like basic rights, Slashdot users sure do like to censor "dissent".
Why do they need an ad hoc working group to maintain the standard? There's already a multi-billion-dollar corporation actively maintaining the standard. The effort seems redundant.
Take off every Sig. For great justice.
> No, "turning it into a reasonable standard" is stupid regardless, because we already have a reasonable standard -- namely, ODF -- and don't need a different one.
A very good point. However, there was one possibility you overlooked. Turn OOXML into a set of extensions to ODF that provide the "missing features" Microsoft is always talking about.
It's quite possibly the only reasonable way to go about things. Not that I don't expect Microsoft to deliberately bungle it (and blame ODF) even if it did happen.
ISO has declared a cease-relevence.
No need for a cease-fire, nothing to shoot at. It's already dead to those of us who witnessed the sell-out process.
That's a reference to SCOX and it's attempt to get $699 from everyone who uses Linux.
Insightful is another possibility, but funny is MUCH more apt.
I think we've pushed this "anyone can grow up to be president" thing too far.
but to the average user, they simply will not care about this
On Usenet/forums I have seen 3 instances already of email attachments that people can't read because the default Save behavior in the new M$ product is OOXML.
The idiots that have the new M$ software are oblivious they are sending out non-compatible junk.
gewg_
fm: microsoft@newsletters.microsoft.com
to: my yahoo account
Open XML: Now an International Standard
New Campaign Helps You Capitalize on ISO/IEC Decision
The Joint Technical Committee of the International Standardization Organization (ISO) and the International Electrotechnical Commission (IEC) have approved Open XML as an international standard file format. The decision gives you significant leverage to drive new business for your Open XML solutions, and attract more customers. Now you can help organizations more efficiently extract real-time business information from integrated systems and data. Manage and recover data. Improve system and application interoperability. And protect documents. Explore the new Open XML Partner Campaign to learn more about Microsoft Office system technologies and the resources available to help promote your Open XML solutions.
But for YOU to talk about your complaining that you can't implement it is too funny. You couldn't implement "Hello World" to save your life, and you think that ISO standards should be subject to "Can peragrin implement it?" test? We'd have no standards at all!!
...but getting rid of software patents involves dealing with various nasty corrupt governments and changing laws, which is hard to do. Ignoring corrupt ISO means..just ignoring them, easy to do.
Jesus Fuck. Did you not see the mention of metaphor? And the metaphor stopped with comparing the act to creating a child from rape but rewarding the rapist by keeping the child. You people need to get a life and a clue. And see a shrink while you are at it cause it sounds like you have issues that you need worked out if a metaphor gets you this bent.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
1) completely drop support for any document created before or
2) add a special case each time you change something, making an even more complete mess out of things. For one thing, ODF uses XML namespaces to tell which language a formula is written in. Handling the special cases becomes as straightforward as handling quirks vs. near standards vs. standards mode in HTML.
My comment was just an observation; and GP's was simply another. Neither of us has had to start insulting you or cursing... so who's getting "this bent"?
With this single stroke of corruption and stupidity, the ISO made itself irrelevant to the IT standards realm. Thanks ISO and goodbye.
Clarification:
Red Car -> ISO body (Judge Doom utters this line in Roger Rabbitt)
Two standards good, one standard better -> reference to Animal Farm
Embrace, extending and extinguish -> Microsoft's handling of the ISO standards-making process
The common thread among all these quotes is how downright sinister they are behind a gentle and seemingly caring facade; they're all working within the system to bring it down from the inside.
- Roey
ISO Calls For OOXML Ceasefire
If I spat in someone's face at a bar and then realized he was three times my size, a heavyweight boxing champion, and very angry with me I might be calling for a ceasefire too! Especially when he stands up and asks someone to watch his drink for a minute.
You can't attempt to take the high road after you've crawled in the mud. Try again.
This is my sig. There are many like it but this one is mine.
Is anyone willing to post the text of the article? ZDNet seems to have been experiencing ‘planned downtime’ for much of the day.
...has little bearing on the here and now and what they have become and what they are trying to protect. They've shattered what they stood for to placate the behemoth. Screw em, I don't care what they did. We can come up with another standards body and I know I'll keep ranking them over this issue and over including locked down patents as a "standard", that needs to change as well, that's disgusting. I just don't care how things used to be, this debacle is a serious and profound game changer, and unless they do a fast 180 and dump ooxml and publicly apologize and run some serious non joke and credible investigations on who influenced whom and how...they can go to hell as far as I am concerned.
Sorry, I am hardcore over this and microsoft's just insistence of turning to crap everything they touch. They should have been broken up, their stock made worthless, and the physical plant and assets sold at auction years ago over all the BS they have pushed. They've gotten off way too light for all their crimes. "Too big to fail" like those rip off thieving investment banks in the news who are getting bailed out by inflating the dollar to worthlessness.. nuts! I think companies like that aren't too big to fail, they are too big to be allowed to exist, yank their corporate charters, dang vampire corporations that can't be killed no matter what they do, it is hideous.
Every single solitary stinking time they get another chance to be righteous dudes they crap all over people. It's hardcoded into their corporate DNA or something. Now they have ISO looking like another one of their vomit puddles. You can defend them or the ISO process all you want, I'll condemn them. Like I said and I'll repeat, they make diebold blackbox hacked voting look like fair and honest elections. They make the MAFIAA look like benevolent honest businessmen. Just take a gander across the web at all the techboards, maybe 1% think this deal with them and ooxml is OK, the rest of the people are dissin them roundly because they deserve it, and now they are trying to justify their actions, just making things worse.
This was almost taken seriously until I saw this point... OOXML is a zip file too. Do your homework better, astroturfer.
ODF allows for extensions as well, you know.
There is a difference between compressing the entire document to minimize its footprint and creating references to tons of 'separate' zip content to try and provide a hack level of extensibility like ODF does.
I don't care if they RAR the freaking content, OOXML is one document structure that 'internally' stores even binary and extraneous data, it doesn't have to resort to packaging up what is not understood like ODF does into ZIP files and leaving it up to the developers to handle or even properly retain this information.
ODF and adding non-standard content via ZIP files is a hack at best, and goes HORRIBLY wrong when you try to create content in the ZIP files that tie back to the structure or text of the main document.
For example, imagine a Sound file that links to the text of the document, and if you play the sound file, you can reference the word spoken with the text in the document or INK. Now imagine this with ODF and you throw this into a crap developer's application that isn't bright enough to even consider this, and any modifications break the document completely.
This EXISTS and is used by tons of users everyday in the Windows and TabletPC world, yet it is 'magic' or outside the 'norm' for people here? WTH? If would be different if these were theories or conceptual uses, but this is stuff that people store and use in documents and have for five years or so now.
Contextual linking not only would apply to Sound, or Ink, but even simple things like revisions and markup, which is something that is even more widely used than freaking Ink.
If ODF is going to be a document standard, then they better become a freaking document standard and support what is in use today, including linked non-textual content.