User: jpmcc Date: 2008-03-21 18:00:57+0000 Modified: native-lang/www/planet/atom.xml native-lang/www/planet/index.html native-lang/www/planet/opml.xml native-lang/www/planet/rss10.xml native-lang/www/planet/rss20.xml
Log: Planet run at Fri Mar 21 18:00:44 GMT 2008 File Changes: Directory: /native-lang/www/planet/ =================================== File [changed]: atom.xml Url: http://native-lang.openoffice.org/source/browse/native-lang/www/planet/atom.xml?r1=1.33&r2=1.34 Delta lines: +32 -56 --------------------- --- atom.xml 2008-03-21 12:00:48+0000 1.33 +++ atom.xml 2008-03-21 18:00:55+0000 1.34 @@ -5,9 +5,36 @@ <link rel="self" href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml"/> <link href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet/"/> <id>http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet/atom.xml</id> - <updated>2008-03-21T12:00:42+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:50+00:00</updated> <generator uri="http://www.planetplanet.org/";>Planet/2.0 +http://www.planetplanet.org</generator> + <entry xml:lang="en"> + <title type="html">Easter Links</title> + <link href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/"/> + <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/</id> + <updated>2008-03-21T14:28:32+00:00</updated> + <content type="html"><p>Today the Easter Bunny (that means me on this blog), who&#8217;s very early because it&#8217;s Good Friday but also the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad and the first day of Spring, is bringing you some links for you to read this week-end.</p> +<p>- Rick Jelliffe <a href="http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-48130/iso-sql-editor-jim-melton-s-view-on-ooxml">gets a cold shower by the SQL standard guru</a>. Boy, that must have frozen you up down there. And besides, it&#8217;s now Fall season for you. Too bad, huh?</p> +<p>- &#8220;<a href="http://dearmicrosoftofficeteam.blogspot.com/">Dear Microsoft Office</a>&#8220;, a great blog by Julie Watson. That girl has many tricks up her sleeves when it comes to Office suite issues and file format troubles. Way to go, Julie!</p> +<p>- <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/03/the-elephant-in.html">The incredible adventure of the Malaysian who turned out to be an U.S citizen</a>. That happens sometimes with Microsoft employees&#8230;</p> +<p>- <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooxml_import_in_writer_a">A shape is a shape is a shape?</a> It&#8217;s not a typo, it&#8217;s just the Sun OpenOffice.org team who has some problems with OOXML. I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s because they&#8217;re biased. Anybody who stands against OOXML (also known as the &#8220;Everlasting Truth&#8221;) should be sentenced to jail! <em>I&#8217;m writing this to deliberately confuse the Microsofties I will meet Tuesday at the Afnor. I know they&#8217;re reading my blog. It&#8217;s part of my secret plan. Mwuhahahaha..</em></p> +<p>- Talking about OpenOffice.org, here&#8217;s a couple of interesting news about the free and standards-compliant office suite. Take a look <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooo_3_est_omnis_divisa">here</a> and <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/accessibility_matters">there</a>.</p> +<p>- The invincible <a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/">John McCreesh</a> strikes again and has now created a<a href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet"> Native-Language Confederation Planet</a> for our reading pleasure. Thank you a lot, and happy Easter, John!</p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=56&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_56" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></content> + <author> + <name>Charles Schulz</name> + <uri>http://standardsandfreedom.net</uri> + </author> + <source> + <title type="html">Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings</title> + <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> + <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> + <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:46+00:00</updated> + </source> + </entry> + <entry xml:lang="utf-8"> <title type="html">Secwepemctsin Project Set Up</title> <link href="http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/"/> @@ -39,7 +66,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">Hirano, Kazunari</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://openoffice.exblog.jp/atom.xml"/> <id>http://openoffice.exblog.jp/atom.xml</id> - <updated>2008-03-21T12:00:41+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:49+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -213,7 +240,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-03-18T06:00:42+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:46+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -258,7 +285,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-03-18T06:00:42+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:46+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> @@ -372,58 +399,7 @@ <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-03-18T06:00:42+00:00</updated> - </source> - </entry> - - <entry xml:lang="en"> - <title type="html">OpenOffice.org und Python - Deutsche &amp;Uuml;bersetzung...</title> - <link href="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/"/> - <id>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/</id> - <updated>2008-02-20T20:50:41+00:00</updated> - <content type="html">Heute habe ich die restlichen Arbeiten an der ersten Version der &Uuml;bersetzung der Information zur Python-Br&uuml;cke von OpenOffice.org fertig gestellt. Die Grafiken im Dokument sind nun auch in deutscher Sprache verf&uuml;gbar. Die &Uuml;bersetzung finden Sie auf auf den Seiten des deutschsprachigen Projektes von OpenOffice.org im Bereich Dokumentation: http://de.openoffice.org/doc/entwicklung/python_bruecke.html. -Viel Erfolg bei der Arbeit mit Python und OpenOffice.org.</content> - <author> - <name>Andreas Mantke</name> - <uri>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/</uri> - </author> - <source> - <title type="html">andreasma_at_ooo</title> - <link rel="self" href="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/rss"/> - <id>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/rss</id> - <updated>2008-03-17T00:00:47+00:00</updated> - </source> - </entry> - - <entry xml:lang="en"> - <title type="html">When is sophism not sophism?</title> - <link href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/"/> - <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/</id> - <updated>2008-02-19T13:42:11+00:00</updated> - <content type="html"><p>Short Answer: When it becomes manipulation. And before some of the Microsofties coiled in their upscale building of the <em>rue de l&#8217;Université </em>in Paris start to wonder if they <em>should not be doing something about me</em>, let me just point you to <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/px03096.pdf">this link: The now famous Plamondon Files</a>, one of whose is adequately named &#8220;Evangelism is War&#8221;. Too late for the Schadenfreude, my dubious friends.</p> -<p>I am afraid Microsoft has embarked in a journey where manipulation and astroturfing will be the longitude and latitude they will use to set their path. But let&#8217;s dive into the specifics.</p> -<p>The OOXML controversy has now reached a new stage. This stage could be labelled as the stage of confusion. The Ecma has answered to 3522 comments (and 3522 unique comments that should be dealt with appropriately, not by grouping hundreds of them because they seem to be the same) in a way that could be considered as positive at first glance. However, any deeper analysis of just a handful of these answers show that most of them have simply not been adequately answered. Aside the mention &#8220;Agreed&#8221; by the Ecma, we have several, not to say hundreds and hundreds of answers that worsen the existing flaws, contradict each other, or propose solutions that avoid any kind of common path with the existing ISO standard, ODF. That&#8217;s just the issue with the comments that have been answered to; others have been ignored. The French convergence proposal has been flatly rejected by the Ecma on formal grounds. Namely -strap yourself- the convergence proposal cannot be properly addressed in the course of a Fast-Track process. What the Ecma forgets to mention here is that it&#8217;s precisely the reason why OOXML should not be approved as an ISO standard, since discussions and proposals on convergence or mentions of conflicts with existing standards do not seem to matter.</p> -<p>At the Afnor meeting we had last Friday, the refusal of the Ecma was discussed; Microsoft and its proxies were trying all sorts of arguments to convince us that the Ecma had not exactly rejected the proposal. They were trying to make the point that the Ecma had already answered the convergence -the harmonization as they call it- in an answer made to the committee of New Zealand. The problem is twofold here, but Microsoft obviously intended to blur the lines and confuse the committee:</p> -<p>-The proposal by the Afnor implied a roadmap and a sanitization work to be made on OOXML. With all due respect to the standards board of New Zealand, its own proposal never contained such a project.</p> -<p>- Most importantly, the Afnor proposal did clearly imply that OOXML would <em>never become an ISO standard </em>(see <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2007/09/10/on-merging/">here</a>). OOXML could become an &#8220;ISO-TS&#8221; (Technical Specification) but there again the Ecma decided on vague formal gounds that the JTC-1 simply could not do it. I know for sure that there are other similar options and titles for the contentious OOXML if it were to follow that path. But the Ecma answer to New Zealand was implying in turn that <em>harmonization could be possible if OOXML became an ISO standard</em>.</p> -<p>I could also mention the odd attempts to push VML back into the OOXML spec&#8230; But there are more cunning aspects that have the obvious effect to confuse people in this story. And when I mean people, I mean ISO delegates, journalists, pundits, laymen, strawmen&#8230; and ultimately, customers. Because customers do pay attention to what&#8217;s going on with the OOXML issue and what will happen in Geneva.</p> -<p>On a legal point of view, the growing uncertainty on patents and intellectual property related to OOXML has gone unnoticed mostly because of the efforts made by the Ecma and Microsoft to alleviate those concerns, mostly through throwing incomplete, half valid protective claims on OOXML. I clearly remember that my company filed a comment pertaining to the legal gaps of the Open Specification Premise and the RAND agreement covering OOXML. Too many points inside the OOXML specifications are left uncovered by them, thus making it hazardous for anybody to implement OOXML. Another, very important point, is Microsoft&#8217;s refusal to make the OSP apply to GPL. That pretty much says it all on Microsoft&#8217;s will to open up the competition. The ODF Alliance has <a href="http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/IssueBriefIPR.pdf">published a very good paper</a> on this issue, but if you want more background on this, I suggest you read <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/02/19/msooxml-all-about-patents/">the excellent article by Roy Schestowitz</a>.</p> -<p>In short, the confusion around intellectual property is so overwhelming that one is left unconvinced at the ability of the ISO to do its homework properly when it comes to patents and more generally IPR. Others have explained that all this was due to Microsoft&#8217;s will to &#8220;drown the fish&#8221; as the French saying goes, but I guess wondering about that at this stage would be beside the point.</p> -<p>Where confusion is obviously the result of a strategy devised by disingenuous people is the case of <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">the Office Binary translation project</a>. After the bombastic announcement by Microsoft that it was to release the &#8220;documentation on its office binary file formats&#8221;, one could have thought that it would be able to receive the full binary specification and perhaps (an immoderate hope), perhaps the actual source code of those binary blurbs. You can always hope, &#8220;ain&#8217;t gonna happen&#8221;&#8230; All what is available is the same old documentation, most of it having been available until 1999 where it was taken off line from MSDN. This documentation is thoroughly incomplete, acutely inadequate and riddled by legal traps at least as bad as the ones carried by the OSP that covers these files. You will notice the subtle art of confusion that speaks of documentation but carefully avoids the words &#8220;full specification&#8221;.</p> -<p>Now the Office Binary to OOXML translator is one of those projects that actually makes OOXML irrelevant as a standard. If this project ever comes to fruition, <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">which is at the moment not the case</a>, anybody -or so one might hope- could use this software to convert its binary, proprietary files from Microsoft Office to the controversial OOXML. But then why did we have OOXML in the first place? What about the advertised ability of OOXML to &#8220;faithfully represent&#8221; the behaviour of past applications? I guess this project should have somehow been included in the OOXML spec in the first place, because it does defeat the purpose of OOXML in the first place.</p> -<p>That&#8217;s one more contradiction for Microsoft to handle. But as I wrote the other day, &#8220;nevermind the money&#8221;&#8230;</p> -<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=44&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_44" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> -</p></content> - <author> - <name>Charles Schulz</name> - <uri>http://standardsandfreedom.net</uri> - </author> - <source> - <title type="html">Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings</title> - <subtitle type="html">A weblog by Charles-H. Schulz.</subtitle> - <link rel="self" href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed"/> - <id>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/category/ooo-postings/feed</id> - <updated>2008-03-18T06:00:42+00:00</updated> + <updated>2008-03-21T18:00:46+00:00</updated> </source> </entry> File [changed]: index.html Url: http://native-lang.openoffice.org/source/browse/native-lang/www/planet/index.html?r1=1.33&r2=1.34 Delta lines: +24 -45 --------------------- --- index.html 2008-03-21 12:00:48+0000 1.33 +++ index.html 2008-03-21 18:00:55+0000 1.34 @@ -27,8 +27,31 @@ <a href="rss20.xml"><img src="rss2.gif" alt="Link to RSS 2 feed" /></a> </div> -<p><em>Bloggings on native language topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: March 21, 2008 12:00 PM GMT</em></p> +<p><em>Bloggings on native language topics by project members - see <a href="#disclaimer">disclaimer</a>.<br />Last updated: March 21, 2008 06:00 PM GMT</em></p> +<h2>March 21, 2008</h2> +<h3> +<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net"; title="Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings"> +Charles Schulz</a> : +<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/";> +Easter Links</a> +</h3> +<p> +<p>Today the Easter Bunny (that means me on this blog), who’s very early because it’s Good Friday but also the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad and the first day of Spring, is bringing you some links for you to read this week-end.</p> +<p>- Rick Jelliffe <a href="http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-48130/iso-sql-editor-jim-melton-s-view-on-ooxml";>gets a cold shower by the SQL standard guru</a>. Boy, that must have frozen you up down there. And besides, it’s now Fall season for you. Too bad, huh?</p> +<p>- “<a href="http://dearmicrosoftofficeteam.blogspot.com/";>Dear Microsoft Office</a>“, a great blog by Julie Watson. That girl has many tricks up her sleeves when it comes to Office suite issues and file format troubles. Way to go, Julie!</p> +<p>- <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/03/the-elephant-in.html";>The incredible adventure of the Malaysian who turned out to be an U.S citizen</a>. That happens sometimes with Microsoft employees…</p> +<p>- <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooxml_import_in_writer_a";>A shape is a shape is a shape?</a> It’s not a typo, it’s just the Sun OpenOffice.org team who has some problems with OOXML. I’m sure it’s because they’re biased. Anybody who stands against OOXML (also known as the “Everlasting Truth”) should be sentenced to jail! <em>I’m writing this to deliberately confuse the Microsofties I will meet Tuesday at the Afnor. I know they’re reading my blog. It’s part of my secret plan. Mwuhahahaha..</em></p> +<p>- Talking about OpenOffice.org, here’s a couple of interesting news about the free and standards-compliant office suite. Take a look <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooo_3_est_omnis_divisa";>here</a> and <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/accessibility_matters";>there</a>.</p> +<p>- The invincible <a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/";>John McCreesh</a> strikes again and has now created a<a href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet";> Native-Language Confederation Planet</a> for our reading pleasure. Thank you a lot, and happy Easter, John!</p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=56&akst_action=share-this"; title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_56" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></p> +<p> +<em><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/";>by Charles at March 21, 2008 02:28 PM GMT</a></em> +</p> +<br /> +<hr /> +<br /> <h2>March 19, 2008</h2> <h3> <a href="http://openoffice.exblog.jp"; title="Hirano, Kazunari"> @@ -348,50 +371,6 @@ <br /> <hr /> <br /> -<h2>February 20, 2008</h2> -<h3> -<a href="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/"; title="andreasma_at_ooo"> -Andreas Mantke</a> : -<a href="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/";> -OpenOffice.org und Python - Deutsche &Uuml;bersetzung...</a> -</h3> -<p> -Heute habe ich die restlichen Arbeiten an der ersten Version der Übersetzung der Information zur Python-Brücke von OpenOffice.org fertig gestellt. Die Grafiken im Dokument sind nun auch in deutscher Sprache verfügbar. Die Übersetzung finden Sie auf auf den Seiten des deutschsprachigen Projektes von OpenOffice.org im Bereich Dokumentation: http://de.openoffice.org/doc/entwicklung/python_bruecke.html. -Viel Erfolg bei der Arbeit mit Python und OpenOffice.org.</p> -<p> -<em><a href="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/";>by andreasma at February 20, 2008 08:50 PM GMT</a></em> -</p> -<br /> -<hr /> -<br /> -<h2>February 19, 2008</h2> -<h3> -<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net"; title="Moved by Freedom - Powered by Standards » OOo Postings"> -Charles Schulz</a> : -<a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/";> -When is sophism not sophism?</a> -</h3> -<p> -<p>Short Answer: When it becomes manipulation. And before some of the Microsofties coiled in their upscale building of the <em>rue de l’Université </em>in Paris start to wonder if they <em>should not be doing something about me</em>, let me just point you to <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/px03096.pdf";>this link: The now famous Plamondon Files</a>, one of whose is adequately named “Evangelism is War”. Too late for the Schadenfreude, my dubious friends.</p> -<p>I am afraid Microsoft has embarked in a journey where manipulation and astroturfing will be the longitude and latitude they will use to set their path. But let’s dive into the specifics.</p> -<p>The OOXML controversy has now reached a new stage. This stage could be labelled as the stage of confusion. The Ecma has answered to 3522 comments (and 3522 unique comments that should be dealt with appropriately, not by grouping hundreds of them because they seem to be the same) in a way that could be considered as positive at first glance. However, any deeper analysis of just a handful of these answers show that most of them have simply not been adequately answered. Aside the mention “Agreed” by the Ecma, we have several, not to say hundreds and hundreds of answers that worsen the existing flaws, contradict each other, or propose solutions that avoid any kind of common path with the existing ISO standard, ODF. That’s just the issue with the comments that have been answered to; others have been ignored. The French convergence proposal has been flatly rejected by the Ecma on formal grounds. Namely -strap yourself- the convergence proposal cannot be properly addressed in the course of a Fast-Track process. What the Ecma forgets to mention here is that it’s precisely the reason why OOXML should not be approved as an ISO standard, since discussions and proposals on convergence or mentions of conflicts with existing standards do not seem to matter.</p> -<p>At the Afnor meeting we had last Friday, the refusal of the Ecma was discussed; Microsoft and its proxies were trying all sorts of arguments to convince us that the Ecma had not exactly rejected the proposal. They were trying to make the point that the Ecma had already answered the convergence -the harmonization as they call it- in an answer made to the committee of New Zealand. The problem is twofold here, but Microsoft obviously intended to blur the lines and confuse the committee:</p> -<p>-The proposal by the Afnor implied a roadmap and a sanitization work to be made on OOXML. With all due respect to the standards board of New Zealand, its own proposal never contained such a project.</p> -<p>- Most importantly, the Afnor proposal did clearly imply that OOXML would <em>never become an ISO standard </em>(see <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2007/09/10/on-merging/";>here</a>). OOXML could become an “ISO-TS” (Technical Specification) but there again the Ecma decided on vague formal gounds that the JTC-1 simply could not do it. I know for sure that there are other similar options and titles for the contentious OOXML if it were to follow that path. But the Ecma answer to New Zealand was implying in turn that <em>harmonization could be possible if OOXML became an ISO standard</em>.</p> -<p>I could also mention the odd attempts to push VML back into the OOXML spec… But there are more cunning aspects that have the obvious effect to confuse people in this story. And when I mean people, I mean ISO delegates, journalists, pundits, laymen, strawmen… and ultimately, customers. Because customers do pay attention to what’s going on with the OOXML issue and what will happen in Geneva.</p> -<p>On a legal point of view, the growing uncertainty on patents and intellectual property related to OOXML has gone unnoticed mostly because of the efforts made by the Ecma and Microsoft to alleviate those concerns, mostly through throwing incomplete, half valid protective claims on OOXML. I clearly remember that my company filed a comment pertaining to the legal gaps of the Open Specification Premise and the RAND agreement covering OOXML. Too many points inside the OOXML specifications are left uncovered by them, thus making it hazardous for anybody to implement OOXML. Another, very important point, is Microsoft’s refusal to make the OSP apply to GPL. That pretty much says it all on Microsoft’s will to open up the competition. The ODF Alliance has <a href="http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/IssueBriefIPR.pdf";>published a very good paper</a> on this issue, but if you want more background on this, I suggest you read <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/02/19/msooxml-all-about-patents/";>the excellent article by Roy Schestowitz</a>.</p> -<p>In short, the confusion around intellectual property is so overwhelming that one is left unconvinced at the ability of the ISO to do its homework properly when it comes to patents and more generally IPR. Others have explained that all this was due to Microsoft’s will to “drown the fish” as the French saying goes, but I guess wondering about that at this stage would be beside the point.</p> -<p>Where confusion is obviously the result of a strategy devised by disingenuous people is the case of <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/";>the Office Binary translation project</a>. After the bombastic announcement by Microsoft that it was to release the “documentation on its office binary file formats”, one could have thought that it would be able to receive the full binary specification and perhaps (an immoderate hope), perhaps the actual source code of those binary blurbs. You can always hope, “ain’t gonna happen”… All what is available is the same old documentation, most of it having been available until 1999 where it was taken off line from MSDN. This documentation is thoroughly incomplete, acutely inadequate and riddled by legal traps at least as bad as the ones carried by the OSP that covers these files. You will notice the subtle art of confusion that speaks of documentation but carefully avoids the words “full specification”.</p> -<p>Now the Office Binary to OOXML translator is one of those projects that actually makes OOXML irrelevant as a standard. If this project ever comes to fruition, <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/";>which is at the moment not the case</a>, anybody -or so one might hope- could use this software to convert its binary, proprietary files from Microsoft Office to the controversial OOXML. But then why did we have OOXML in the first place? What about the advertised ability of OOXML to “faithfully represent” the behaviour of past applications? I guess this project should have somehow been included in the OOXML spec in the first place, because it does defeat the purpose of OOXML in the first place.</p> -<p>That’s one more contradiction for Microsoft to handle. But as I wrote the other day, “nevermind the money”…</p> -<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=44&akst_action=share-this"; title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_44" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> -</p></p> -<p> -<em><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/";>by Charles at February 19, 2008 01:42 PM GMT</a></em> -</p> -<br /> -<hr /> -<br /> <a id="disclaimer" name="disclaimer"></a> <p><em>Disclaimer: all views expressed on this page are those of the individual contributors, and may not reflect the views of the File [changed]: opml.xml Url: http://native-lang.openoffice.org/source/browse/native-lang/www/planet/opml.xml?r1=1.33&r2=1.34 Delta lines: +1 -1 ------------------- --- opml.xml 2008-03-21 12:00:48+0000 1.33 +++ opml.xml 2008-03-21 18:00:55+0000 1.34 @@ -2,7 +2,7 @@ <opml version="1.1"> <head> <title>Native Language Confederation Planet</title> - <dateModified>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 12:00:42 +0000</dateModified> + <dateModified>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 18:00:50 +0000</dateModified> <ownerName>Native Language Confederation</ownerName> <ownerEmail>[EMAIL PROTECTED]</ownerEmail> </head> File [changed]: rss10.xml Url: http://native-lang.openoffice.org/source/browse/native-lang/www/planet/rss10.xml?r1=1.7&r2=1.8 Delta lines: +15 -28 --------------------- --- rss10.xml 2008-03-21 12:00:48+0000 1.7 +++ rss10.xml 2008-03-21 18:00:55+0000 1.8 @@ -13,6 +13,7 @@ <items> <rdf:Seq> + <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1074868/"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:sophiegautier.com,2008-03-14:/blog/62" /> @@ -26,12 +27,24 @@ <rdf:li rdf:resource="tag:sophiegautier.com,2008-03-01:/blog/59" /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1055572/"; /> <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/22/rumours-of-microsoft-opening-up-greatly-exaggerated/"; /> - <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/"; /> - <rdf:li rdf:resource="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/"; /> </rdf:Seq> </items> </channel> +<item rdf:about="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/";> + <title>Charles Schulz: Easter Links</title> + <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/</link> + <content:encoded><p>Today the Easter Bunny (that means me on this blog), who&#8217;s very early because it&#8217;s Good Friday but also the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad and the first day of Spring, is bringing you some links for you to read this week-end.</p> +<p>- Rick Jelliffe <a href="http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-48130/iso-sql-editor-jim-melton-s-view-on-ooxml">gets a cold shower by the SQL standard guru</a>. Boy, that must have frozen you up down there. And besides, it&#8217;s now Fall season for you. Too bad, huh?</p> +<p>- &#8220;<a href="http://dearmicrosoftofficeteam.blogspot.com/">Dear Microsoft Office</a>&#8220;, a great blog by Julie Watson. That girl has many tricks up her sleeves when it comes to Office suite issues and file format troubles. Way to go, Julie!</p> +<p>- <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/03/the-elephant-in.html">The incredible adventure of the Malaysian who turned out to be an U.S citizen</a>. That happens sometimes with Microsoft employees&#8230;</p> +<p>- <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooxml_import_in_writer_a">A shape is a shape is a shape?</a> It&#8217;s not a typo, it&#8217;s just the Sun OpenOffice.org team who has some problems with OOXML. I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s because they&#8217;re biased. Anybody who stands against OOXML (also known as the &#8220;Everlasting Truth&#8221;) should be sentenced to jail! <em>I&#8217;m writing this to deliberately confuse the Microsofties I will meet Tuesday at the Afnor. I know they&#8217;re reading my blog. It&#8217;s part of my secret plan. Mwuhahahaha..</em></p> +<p>- Talking about OpenOffice.org, here&#8217;s a couple of interesting news about the free and standards-compliant office suite. Take a look <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooo_3_est_omnis_divisa">here</a> and <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/accessibility_matters">there</a>.</p> +<p>- The invincible <a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/">John McCreesh</a> strikes again and has now created a<a href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet"> Native-Language Confederation Planet</a> for our reading pleasure. Thank you a lot, and happy Easter, John!</p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=56&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_56" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></content:encoded> + <dc:date>2008-03-21T14:28:32+00:00</dc:date> +</item> <item rdf:about="http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/";> <title>Kazunari Hirano: Secwepemctsin Project Set Up</title> <link>http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/</link> @@ -241,31 +254,5 @@ </p></content:encoded> <dc:date>2008-02-22T17:46:29+00:00</dc:date> </item> -<item rdf:about="http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/";> - <title>Andreas Mantke: OpenOffice.org und Python - Deutsche &Uuml;bersetzung...</title> - <link>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/</link> - <content:encoded>Heute habe ich die restlichen Arbeiten an der ersten Version der &Uuml;bersetzung der Information zur Python-Br&uuml;cke von OpenOffice.org fertig gestellt. Die Grafiken im Dokument sind nun auch in deutscher Sprache verf&uuml;gbar. Die &Uuml;bersetzung finden Sie auf auf den Seiten des deutschsprachigen Projektes von OpenOffice.org im Bereich Dokumentation: http://de.openoffice.org/doc/entwicklung/python_bruecke.html. -Viel Erfolg bei der Arbeit mit Python und OpenOffice.org.</content:encoded> - <dc:date>2008-02-20T20:50:41+00:00</dc:date> -</item> -<item rdf:about="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/";> - <title>Charles Schulz: When is sophism not sophism?</title> - <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/</link> - <content:encoded><p>Short Answer: When it becomes manipulation. And before some of the Microsofties coiled in their upscale building of the <em>rue de l&#8217;Université </em>in Paris start to wonder if they <em>should not be doing something about me</em>, let me just point you to <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/px03096.pdf">this link: The now famous Plamondon Files</a>, one of whose is adequately named &#8220;Evangelism is War&#8221;. Too late for the Schadenfreude, my dubious friends.</p> -<p>I am afraid Microsoft has embarked in a journey where manipulation and astroturfing will be the longitude and latitude they will use to set their path. But let&#8217;s dive into the specifics.</p> -<p>The OOXML controversy has now reached a new stage. This stage could be labelled as the stage of confusion. The Ecma has answered to 3522 comments (and 3522 unique comments that should be dealt with appropriately, not by grouping hundreds of them because they seem to be the same) in a way that could be considered as positive at first glance. However, any deeper analysis of just a handful of these answers show that most of them have simply not been adequately answered. Aside the mention &#8220;Agreed&#8221; by the Ecma, we have several, not to say hundreds and hundreds of answers that worsen the existing flaws, contradict each other, or propose solutions that avoid any kind of common path with the existing ISO standard, ODF. That&#8217;s just the issue with the comments that have been answered to; others have been ignored. The French convergence proposal has been flatly rejected by the Ecma on formal grounds. Namely -strap yourself- the convergence proposal cannot be properly addressed in the course of a Fast-Track process. What the Ecma forgets to mention here is that it&#8217;s precisely the reason why OOXML should not be approved as an ISO standard, since discussions and proposals on convergence or mentions of conflicts with existing standards do not seem to matter.</p> -<p>At the Afnor meeting we had last Friday, the refusal of the Ecma was discussed; Microsoft and its proxies were trying all sorts of arguments to convince us that the Ecma had not exactly rejected the proposal. They were trying to make the point that the Ecma had already answered the convergence -the harmonization as they call it- in an answer made to the committee of New Zealand. The problem is twofold here, but Microsoft obviously intended to blur the lines and confuse the committee:</p> -<p>-The proposal by the Afnor implied a roadmap and a sanitization work to be made on OOXML. With all due respect to the standards board of New Zealand, its own proposal never contained such a project.</p> -<p>- Most importantly, the Afnor proposal did clearly imply that OOXML would <em>never become an ISO standard </em>(see <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2007/09/10/on-merging/">here</a>). OOXML could become an &#8220;ISO-TS&#8221; (Technical Specification) but there again the Ecma decided on vague formal gounds that the JTC-1 simply could not do it. I know for sure that there are other similar options and titles for the contentious OOXML if it were to follow that path. But the Ecma answer to New Zealand was implying in turn that <em>harmonization could be possible if OOXML became an ISO standard</em>.</p> -<p>I could also mention the odd attempts to push VML back into the OOXML spec&#8230; But there are more cunning aspects that have the obvious effect to confuse people in this story. And when I mean people, I mean ISO delegates, journalists, pundits, laymen, strawmen&#8230; and ultimately, customers. Because customers do pay attention to what&#8217;s going on with the OOXML issue and what will happen in Geneva.</p> -<p>On a legal point of view, the growing uncertainty on patents and intellectual property related to OOXML has gone unnoticed mostly because of the efforts made by the Ecma and Microsoft to alleviate those concerns, mostly through throwing incomplete, half valid protective claims on OOXML. I clearly remember that my company filed a comment pertaining to the legal gaps of the Open Specification Premise and the RAND agreement covering OOXML. Too many points inside the OOXML specifications are left uncovered by them, thus making it hazardous for anybody to implement OOXML. Another, very important point, is Microsoft&#8217;s refusal to make the OSP apply to GPL. That pretty much says it all on Microsoft&#8217;s will to open up the competition. The ODF Alliance has <a href="http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/IssueBriefIPR.pdf">published a very good paper</a> on this issue, but if you want more background on this, I suggest you read <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/02/19/msooxml-all-about-patents/">the excellent article by Roy Schestowitz</a>.</p> -<p>In short, the confusion around intellectual property is so overwhelming that one is left unconvinced at the ability of the ISO to do its homework properly when it comes to patents and more generally IPR. Others have explained that all this was due to Microsoft&#8217;s will to &#8220;drown the fish&#8221; as the French saying goes, but I guess wondering about that at this stage would be beside the point.</p> -<p>Where confusion is obviously the result of a strategy devised by disingenuous people is the case of <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">the Office Binary translation project</a>. After the bombastic announcement by Microsoft that it was to release the &#8220;documentation on its office binary file formats&#8221;, one could have thought that it would be able to receive the full binary specification and perhaps (an immoderate hope), perhaps the actual source code of those binary blurbs. You can always hope, &#8220;ain&#8217;t gonna happen&#8221;&#8230; All what is available is the same old documentation, most of it having been available until 1999 where it was taken off line from MSDN. This documentation is thoroughly incomplete, acutely inadequate and riddled by legal traps at least as bad as the ones carried by the OSP that covers these files. You will notice the subtle art of confusion that speaks of documentation but carefully avoids the words &#8220;full specification&#8221;.</p> -<p>Now the Office Binary to OOXML translator is one of those projects that actually makes OOXML irrelevant as a standard. If this project ever comes to fruition, <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">which is at the moment not the case</a>, anybody -or so one might hope- could use this software to convert its binary, proprietary files from Microsoft Office to the controversial OOXML. But then why did we have OOXML in the first place? What about the advertised ability of OOXML to &#8220;faithfully represent&#8221; the behaviour of past applications? I guess this project should have somehow been included in the OOXML spec in the first place, because it does defeat the purpose of OOXML in the first place.</p> -<p>That&#8217;s one more contradiction for Microsoft to handle. But as I wrote the other day, &#8220;nevermind the money&#8221;&#8230;</p> -<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=44&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_44" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> -</p></content:encoded> - <dc:date>2008-02-19T13:42:11+00:00</dc:date> -</item> </rdf:RDF> File [changed]: rss20.xml Url: http://native-lang.openoffice.org/source/browse/native-lang/www/planet/rss20.xml?r1=1.7&r2=1.8 Delta lines: +15 -28 --------------------- --- rss20.xml 2008-03-21 12:00:48+0000 1.7 +++ rss20.xml 2008-03-21 18:00:55+0000 1.8 @@ -8,6 +8,21 @@ <description>Native Language Confederation Planet - http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet/</description> <item> + <title>Charles Schulz: Easter Links</title> + <guid>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/</guid> + <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/03/21/easter-links/</link> + <description><p>Today the Easter Bunny (that means me on this blog), who&#8217;s very early because it&#8217;s Good Friday but also the birthday of the Prophet Muhammad and the first day of Spring, is bringing you some links for you to read this week-end.</p> +<p>- Rick Jelliffe <a href="http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-48130/iso-sql-editor-jim-melton-s-view-on-ooxml">gets a cold shower by the SQL standard guru</a>. Boy, that must have frozen you up down there. And besides, it&#8217;s now Fall season for you. Too bad, huh?</p> +<p>- &#8220;<a href="http://dearmicrosoftofficeteam.blogspot.com/">Dear Microsoft Office</a>&#8220;, a great blog by Julie Watson. That girl has many tricks up her sleeves when it comes to Office suite issues and file format troubles. Way to go, Julie!</p> +<p>- <a href="http://www.openmalaysiablog.com/2008/03/the-elephant-in.html">The incredible adventure of the Malaysian who turned out to be an U.S citizen</a>. That happens sometimes with Microsoft employees&#8230;</p> +<p>- <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooxml_import_in_writer_a">A shape is a shape is a shape?</a> It&#8217;s not a typo, it&#8217;s just the Sun OpenOffice.org team who has some problems with OOXML. I&#8217;m sure it&#8217;s because they&#8217;re biased. Anybody who stands against OOXML (also known as the &#8220;Everlasting Truth&#8221;) should be sentenced to jail! <em>I&#8217;m writing this to deliberately confuse the Microsofties I will meet Tuesday at the Afnor. I know they&#8217;re reading my blog. It&#8217;s part of my secret plan. Mwuhahahaha..</em></p> +<p>- Talking about OpenOffice.org, here&#8217;s a couple of interesting news about the free and standards-compliant office suite. Take a look <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/ooo_3_est_omnis_divisa">here</a> and <a href="http://blogs.sun.com/GullFOSS/entry/accessibility_matters">there</a>.</p> +<p>- The invincible <a href="http://www.mealldubh.org/">John McCreesh</a> strikes again and has now created a<a href="http://native-lang.openoffice.org/planet"> Native-Language Confederation Planet</a> for our reading pleasure. Thank you a lot, and happy Easter, John!</p> +<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=56&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_56" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> +</p></description> + <pubDate>Fri, 21 Mar 2008 14:28:32 +0000</pubDate> +</item> +<item> <title>Kazunari Hirano: Secwepemctsin Project Set Up</title> <guid>http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/</guid> <link>http://openoffice.exblog.jp/6917987/</link> @@ -224,34 +239,6 @@ </p></description> <pubDate>Fri, 22 Feb 2008 17:46:29 +0000</pubDate> </item> -<item> - <title>Andreas Mantke: OpenOffice.org und Python - Deutsche &Uuml;bersetzung...</title> - <guid>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/</guid> - <link>http://andreasmaooo.blogger.de/stories/1053007/</link> - <description>Heute habe ich die restlichen Arbeiten an der ersten Version der &Uuml;bersetzung der Information zur Python-Br&uuml;cke von OpenOffice.org fertig gestellt. Die Grafiken im Dokument sind nun auch in deutscher Sprache verf&uuml;gbar. Die &Uuml;bersetzung finden Sie auf auf den Seiten des deutschsprachigen Projektes von OpenOffice.org im Bereich Dokumentation: http://de.openoffice.org/doc/entwicklung/python_bruecke.html. -Viel Erfolg bei der Arbeit mit Python und OpenOffice.org.</description> - <pubDate>Wed, 20 Feb 2008 20:50:41 +0000</pubDate> -</item> -<item> - <title>Charles Schulz: When is sophism not sophism?</title> - <guid>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/</guid> - <link>http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2008/02/19/when-is-sophism-not-sophism/</link> - <description><p>Short Answer: When it becomes manipulation. And before some of the Microsofties coiled in their upscale building of the <em>rue de l&#8217;Université </em>in Paris start to wonder if they <em>should not be doing something about me</em>, let me just point you to <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/wp-content/uploads/2008/02/px03096.pdf">this link: The now famous Plamondon Files</a>, one of whose is adequately named &#8220;Evangelism is War&#8221;. Too late for the Schadenfreude, my dubious friends.</p> -<p>I am afraid Microsoft has embarked in a journey where manipulation and astroturfing will be the longitude and latitude they will use to set their path. But let&#8217;s dive into the specifics.</p> -<p>The OOXML controversy has now reached a new stage. This stage could be labelled as the stage of confusion. The Ecma has answered to 3522 comments (and 3522 unique comments that should be dealt with appropriately, not by grouping hundreds of them because they seem to be the same) in a way that could be considered as positive at first glance. However, any deeper analysis of just a handful of these answers show that most of them have simply not been adequately answered. Aside the mention &#8220;Agreed&#8221; by the Ecma, we have several, not to say hundreds and hundreds of answers that worsen the existing flaws, contradict each other, or propose solutions that avoid any kind of common path with the existing ISO standard, ODF. That&#8217;s just the issue with the comments that have been answered to; others have been ignored. The French convergence proposal has been flatly rejected by the Ecma on formal grounds. Namely -strap yourself- the convergence proposal cannot be properly addressed in the course of a Fast-Track process. What the Ecma forgets to mention here is that it&#8217;s precisely the reason why OOXML should not be approved as an ISO standard, since discussions and proposals on convergence or mentions of conflicts with existing standards do not seem to matter.</p> -<p>At the Afnor meeting we had last Friday, the refusal of the Ecma was discussed; Microsoft and its proxies were trying all sorts of arguments to convince us that the Ecma had not exactly rejected the proposal. They were trying to make the point that the Ecma had already answered the convergence -the harmonization as they call it- in an answer made to the committee of New Zealand. The problem is twofold here, but Microsoft obviously intended to blur the lines and confuse the committee:</p> -<p>-The proposal by the Afnor implied a roadmap and a sanitization work to be made on OOXML. With all due respect to the standards board of New Zealand, its own proposal never contained such a project.</p> -<p>- Most importantly, the Afnor proposal did clearly imply that OOXML would <em>never become an ISO standard </em>(see <a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/index.php/2007/09/10/on-merging/">here</a>). OOXML could become an &#8220;ISO-TS&#8221; (Technical Specification) but there again the Ecma decided on vague formal gounds that the JTC-1 simply could not do it. I know for sure that there are other similar options and titles for the contentious OOXML if it were to follow that path. But the Ecma answer to New Zealand was implying in turn that <em>harmonization could be possible if OOXML became an ISO standard</em>.</p> -<p>I could also mention the odd attempts to push VML back into the OOXML spec&#8230; But there are more cunning aspects that have the obvious effect to confuse people in this story. And when I mean people, I mean ISO delegates, journalists, pundits, laymen, strawmen&#8230; and ultimately, customers. Because customers do pay attention to what&#8217;s going on with the OOXML issue and what will happen in Geneva.</p> -<p>On a legal point of view, the growing uncertainty on patents and intellectual property related to OOXML has gone unnoticed mostly because of the efforts made by the Ecma and Microsoft to alleviate those concerns, mostly through throwing incomplete, half valid protective claims on OOXML. I clearly remember that my company filed a comment pertaining to the legal gaps of the Open Specification Premise and the RAND agreement covering OOXML. Too many points inside the OOXML specifications are left uncovered by them, thus making it hazardous for anybody to implement OOXML. Another, very important point, is Microsoft&#8217;s refusal to make the OSP apply to GPL. That pretty much says it all on Microsoft&#8217;s will to open up the competition. The ODF Alliance has <a href="http://www.odfalliance.org/resources/IssueBriefIPR.pdf">published a very good paper</a> on this issue, but if you want more background on this, I suggest you read <a href="http://boycottnovell.com/2008/02/19/msooxml-all-about-patents/">the excellent article by Roy Schestowitz</a>.</p> -<p>In short, the confusion around intellectual property is so overwhelming that one is left unconvinced at the ability of the ISO to do its homework properly when it comes to patents and more generally IPR. Others have explained that all this was due to Microsoft&#8217;s will to &#8220;drown the fish&#8221; as the French saying goes, but I guess wondering about that at this stage would be beside the point.</p> -<p>Where confusion is obviously the result of a strategy devised by disingenuous people is the case of <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">the Office Binary translation project</a>. After the bombastic announcement by Microsoft that it was to release the &#8220;documentation on its office binary file formats&#8221;, one could have thought that it would be able to receive the full binary specification and perhaps (an immoderate hope), perhaps the actual source code of those binary blurbs. You can always hope, &#8220;ain&#8217;t gonna happen&#8221;&#8230; All what is available is the same old documentation, most of it having been available until 1999 where it was taken off line from MSDN. This documentation is thoroughly incomplete, acutely inadequate and riddled by legal traps at least as bad as the ones carried by the OSP that covers these files. You will notice the subtle art of confusion that speaks of documentation but carefully avoids the words &#8220;full specification&#8221;.</p> -<p>Now the Office Binary to OOXML translator is one of those projects that actually makes OOXML irrelevant as a standard. If this project ever comes to fruition, <a href="http://b2xtranslator.sourceforge.net/">which is at the moment not the case</a>, anybody -or so one might hope- could use this software to convert its binary, proprietary files from Microsoft Office to the controversial OOXML. But then why did we have OOXML in the first place? What about the advertised ability of OOXML to &#8220;faithfully represent&#8221; the behaviour of past applications? I guess this project should have somehow been included in the OOXML spec in the first place, because it does defeat the purpose of OOXML in the first place.</p> -<p>That&#8217;s one more contradiction for Microsoft to handle. But as I wrote the other day, &#8220;nevermind the money&#8221;&#8230;</p> -<p class="akst_link"><a href="http://standardsandfreedom.net/?p=44&amp;akst_action=share-this" title="E-mail this, post to del.icio.us, etc." id="akst_link_44" class="akst_share_link" rel="nofollow">Share This</a> -</p></description> - <pubDate>Tue, 19 Feb 2008 13:42:11 +0000</pubDate> -</item> </channel> </rss> --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
