[Desktop_architects] OOXML - national bodies voting

Klaus Knopper knopper at knopper.net
Mon Aug 27 00:04:56 PDT 2007

On Sun, Aug 26, 2007 at 11:05:50PM -0700, John Cherry wrote:
> Those of us at the Linux Foundation are working to reject Microsoft's
> bid to win ISO ratification for their DIS 29500 (OOXML) specification
> for office document file formats. The world already has an ISO standard
> for this problem and it's ODF or ISO 26300. The JTC1 5 month ballot
> period closes September 2nd.

I'm sorry, "The world already has an ISO standard or this problem and
it's ODF"  is not a good argument in my opinion. It sounds much like
"The world already has one operating system, and it is Windows".
Usually, we are all for diversity and open standards, aren't we? For
rejecting an application for standardization, there should be just
technical and verifyable formal reasons:

- The proposed standard must be implementable by everyone. Insufficient
  or vendor-specific documentation cannot be implemented by
  anyone in full.

- The proposed standard must be architecture- and operating-system

- The proposed standard must not be obfuscated.

- All components and interfaces must be openly disclosed and
  documented in full, and not given as a "container" for proprietary

- The proposed standard must not contain patented/proprietary components.

- Implementing the standard must be royalty-free.


Have you read the OOXML documentation in order to make the above
statements, which would be very valid reasons for a rejection?

> With September 2nd looming, the Linux Foundation is going to come out
> with a "formal" statement on Tuesday.  I realize that there have been
> document format wars raging in the blogs and the press for months, but I
> thought it would be a nice touch to the LF position statement if we
> could augment the statement with comments from the community of desktop
> architects (you guys).
> I am constructing a "quotes page" for specific comments from the desktop
> architects.  I will either pick these quotes up from the list here or
> you can send them to me directly.  If you post a short position
> statement of your own, there is a possibility that we will use it in the
> LF position statement as well, so please don't send anything to me that
> you don't want to have quoted.  All quotes on the "quotes page" must be
> attributed to somebody (nothing anonymous).

You can quote the "-" indented statements from me above. But I would
really be happy if we all know what we are talking about. Just disliking
anything from a proprietary vendor is insufficient for a serious

With kind regards
-Klaus Knopper

More information about the Desktop_architects mailing list