[discuss] OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Y'all,
Great news!  We've just past the critical 15% threshold of support votes 
for OASIS membership ratification of the OOo OpenDocument XML universal 
file format specification.  This is not a trivial feat, and it was touch 
and go as of this mornings tally where the vote had stagnated at 13%.  
We needed at least 15% of the voting representatives in support of the 
file format for ratification as an OASIS Standard.  As of 3:43 PM 
Pacific, we got it.  The tally now sits at 16% with no negative votes or 
post of negative comments recorded (56 votes out of 341 delegates). 

The voting began on April 16th and ends on Saturday, April 30th.
Many of the supporting votes came at the personal requests of the OASIS 
OpenDoc TC members.  And many of these votes are acts of courage since 
the voting results are a matter of public record.  At completion of the 
voting, i will post a summary of the votes for the community to see.  
Hopefully we will greet with open arms the support that came from known 
and previously unknown friends who stepped up when we most needed them.

Following the expected ratification on Saturday, i will also post a 
request for consideration on a number of issues that have been tabled 
during this critical time period.  The issues cover OpenDocument logo 
use, marketing conformance, compliance and testing, and, future 
standards ratification at ISO and possibly the W3C.

Congrats to the OpenOffice.org Community for a job well done.  We are on 
the threshold of achieving a major high water mark in the standards 
process.  The universal file format is well on its way to changing 
forever the way information is exchanged and managed.  Applications will 
never be the same.  Hello Internet, the next generation of collaborative 
computing has arrived.

~ge~

[discuss] Re: OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

Lars D.   wrote:
That is really great news.  Gary, can you post a URL for a press release 
after the voting is complete on Saturday or Sunday?
Hi Lars,
Yes, we will all be celebrating on Saturday.  We are now at 20% (68 out 
of 341 delegates in favor of the OpenDocument).  From here we can pretty 
much coast into Saturday's close of the ballot.  There are no negative 
votes yet.  Not even from Microsoft.

OASIS has planned a press release, which i'll forward to the community.
One of the things i need to discuss with the community though are the 
various issues i have with OASIS.  Well, these are actually issues that 
the community has with OASIS.

Basically i think they (OASIS) have recently undergone some significant 
changes, and might now be considered hostile to Open Source Communities. 
 The new OASIS IPR policy is but one of the issues that troubles me. 
But let's save the garbage till after Saturday.  Today we are heading 
for a major triumph.  A hard won victory for the future of Internet 
based collaborative computing.  An Open Source success with Open 
Standards that will reverberate for years to come.

And we are on the cusp of a major change in how the volumes of mankind's 
knowledge can be created, stored, worked, and re purposed for centuries 
to come.  The age of a structured, portable, universal file format that 
is cross platform, inter application, and collaborative Internet ready 
is at hand.

Ready the champagne my friends.  I think we've crossed that first, most 
difficult, hurdle.
~ge~

-Lars
Lars Nooden ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
Software patents harm all Net-based business, write your MEP:
http://wwwdb.europarl.eu.int/ep6/owa/p_meps2.repartition?ilg=EN
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Alexandro,
Good point.  I'm thinking that Metro is primarily a
replacement/alternative for PDF.   One of the more interesting requests
that came before the OASIS OpenDocument TC was from the ORACLE
Collaboration Suite workgroup.  They asked if we would implement a
simple flag that would enable applications to mark an OpenDocument for
"print only".   The idea being that they wanted to replace PDF with
OpenDocument.  They were also considering participation with the effort
to create a browser plug-in for direct rendering of OpenDocuments.
It's interesting to note that the Adobe representative, Duane Nickull,
was one of the first of the OASIS delegates to cast their vote in
support of OpenDocument.  In November of 2004, on the same day that
Microsoft conceded to EU requirements and agreed to provide OpenDocument
filters, IBM and Adobe also announced compliance with those same
requirements.  IBM WorkPlace is of course comprised of OOo components,
so they qualify.  What was intriguing about the announcement was that
Adobe intended on integrating WorkPlace into their application stack,
and therefore could claim similar compliance.
In the past i have personally appealed to Adobe to participate with the
OASIS OpenDocument TC regarding the extension of metadata
functionality.  The Adobe XMP Metadata model supposedly now runs through
their entire stack of applications and file formats.  I didn't get
anywhere with my request though.  Maybe things have changed since then?
Or, maybe the announcement of MS Metro will spur Adobe's thinking about
direct participation with OpenDocument?
~ge~
  "I wonder if mycrosoft respond to all this EU validating
OASIS as the standard has to do with the recent exposure of METRO
(http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/print/metro_FAQ.mspx)
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Alexandro,
Good point.  I'm thinking that Metro is primarily a 
replacement/alternative for PDF.   One of the more interesting requests 
that came before the OASIS OpenDocument TC was from the ORACLE 
Collaboration Suite workgroup.  They asked if we would implement a 
simple flag that would enable applications to mark an OpenDocument for 
"print only".   The idea being that they wanted to replace PDF with 
OpenDocument.  They were also considering participation with the effort 
to create a browser plug-in for direct rendering of OpenDocuments. 

It's interesting to note that the Adobe representative, Duane Nickull, 
was one of the first of the OASIS delegates to cast their vote in 
support of OpenDocument.  In November of 2004, on the same day that 
Microsoft conceded to EU requirements and agreed to provide OpenDocument 
filters, IBM and Adobe also announced compliance with those same 
requirements.  IBM WorkPlace is of course comprised of OOo components, 
so they qualify.  What was intriguing about the announcement was that 
Adobe intended on integrating WorkPlace into their application stack, 
and therefore could claim similar compliance.

In the past i have personally appealed to Adobe to participate with the 
OASIS OpenDocument TC regarding the extension of metadata 
functionality.  The Adobe XMP Metadata model supposedly now runs through 
their entire stack of applications and file formats.  I didn't get 
anywhere with my request though.  Maybe things have changed since then?  
Or, maybe the announcement of MS Metro will spur Adobe's thinking about 
direct participation with OpenDocument?

~ge~
  "I wonder if mycrosoft respond to all this EU validating 
OASIS as the standard has to do with the recent exposure of METRO
(http://www.microsoft.com/whdc/device/print/metro_FAQ.mspx)
--
Alexandro Colorado
Co-Leader of OpenOffice.org Spanish
http://es.openoffice.org/

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Christian,
"There are many of us in the community, including myself 
foremost of all, who will probably not appreciate the significance of 
this news for quite some time.

Well, ponder this.  The European Union requirements specifically state 
that information systems and applications must support an Open XML file 
format that is approved by, maintained by, and managed by an 
Internationally recognized Open Standards Group.  Having some hesitation 
about OASIS (which has since proven to be a most valid concern), the EU 
requested that the OASIS OpenDocument TC submit the OpenDocument 
specification to ISO following OASIS approval.

We need this approval Christian.  The EU needs this approval.
Let's take the concern one step further.  In March the Commonwealth of 
Massachusetts released their requirements for future information system 
purchases.  This followed months of sturm und drang posturing by Eric 
Kriss, the Massachusetts official who set out to make Open Standards and 
Open Source the foundation of the Commonwealths digital future.  IMHO 
the whole thing was a set up, a trap cooked up between Eric and 
Microsoft to confuse the marketplace as to what an Open Standard is, 
and, at the same time smear Open Source efforts regarding compliance 
with the new quagmire of definitions for the meaning of both  "Open" and 
"Open Standards".   

If you don't believe me, just ask yourself who loses when the 
Commonwealth trumpets loudly their decision to go with Open Standards 
and Open XML file formats, and then proceeds to stamp Microsoft 
proprietary implementations, restrictive licenses, and patent encumbered 
file formats as both Open and Standard?  And qualifying as Open XML 
technologies!  Open Source loses!  The marketplace of computational 
services and information systems loses because there is no longer any 
transparency or guarantee the "Open" means open.

But there is that moment when confusing the marketplace of Open 
Standards and Open XML technologies just didn't go quite far enough.  So 
what do they do?  They list a number of file formats as Open Standards 
that meet their requirements.  They list the one way PDF as an open 
standard file format.  They include that byzantine marvel of rube 
goldberg innovative confusion, the RTF file format, as an open 
standard.  They go further to stamp the proprietary, restrictive, and 
patently secretive MSXML file format as an open standard.   An 
incredible act that ushers in acceptance of all the proprietary 
Microsoft file formats as open and acceptable in that they can be 
transformed into MSXML.

And what do they do with OpenDocument?  They mark it acceptable as an 
open standard "pending" ratification by OASIS.

Why is OpenDocument the only file format in the Commonwealth's list that 
requires ratification by an Open Standards Group?   Yeah.  You got it.  
It's a set up.  And Open Source is the target.

We need this ratification by OASIS.  Then we need to get the 
specification to ISO as soon as possible.  The new OASIS IPR policy 
(Intellectual Property Rights) has truly corrupted the Open Standards 
process at OASIS.  The EU saw it coming.  And our benefactor Sun saw 
this coming years ago when the specification was first submitted to 
OASIS.  But i'll save that rant for another day.  After the voting 
closes.  (Now at 84 of 341 delegates voting in support of OpenDocument 
.. 25%  and we're in the final hours). 

~ge~
Christian Einfeldt wrote:
Hi Gary,
Thanks for keeping us informed of this very nitty gritty geeky but 
apparently crucial piece of news.  There are many of us in the 
community, including myself foremost of all, who will probably not 
appreciate the significance of this news for quite some time.  I do 
get the sense, though, that a good comparison for this news would 
be akin to Munich's announcement of its decision to go open source, 
even though this decision will probably not hit the world press as 
that decision did. 
 

[discuss] Re: OASIS OpenDoc Ratification

[Gary Edwards]

John W. Kennedy wrote:
"Yes, but at least the Microsoft standards are Microsoft 
standards. OpenDocument, until OASIS acts, isn't /any body's/ standard 
-- not even OOo's, since OOo 2.0 is in beta.

Hi John,
As of 9:00 PM, EST OASIS has acted.  The OOo OpenDocument has been 
ratified as an official OASIS Open Standard.

So now the world can choose.  They can choose the proprietary Microsoft 
standards, which are at least Microsoft standards.  Or they can choose a 
Global Open XML Standard.

What a tough decision.  On the one hand we have an unstructured 
proprietary format that is arbitrarily changed to make certain that 
Microsoft remains one of the most profitable companies in mankind's 
history.Yes, Microsoft file formats are the defacto standard.   Such 
is the way of the Monopolist.  But during the anti trust trial, the 
evidence proved, and Microsoft was convicted of some the most deceitful, 
despicable, dishonest and thoroughly reprehensible business practices 
ever to come before a Federal Court of Justice or otherwise be disclosed 
in public.

So you can choose to put your information and your information processes 
in the trusted hands of a convicted monopolist, a hardened recidivist 
reprobate.  Or, you could put your information into an open, highly 
structured, XML file format that is now recognized as an International 
Open Standard.  And, you might also want to consider converting your 
information processes over to an Open Standards based, open source 
community driven cross platform productivity environment that can 
natively consume and produce OpenDocument file formats.

And gee, there is that issue of the Internet becoming the platform for 
everything.  At the recent OSBC 2005, Jeffrey Moore, author of "Crossing 
the Chasm", stated that there is no such thing as software being 
developed today that doesn't involve open Internet protocols, methods, 
and interfaces.  It truly is becoming the universal platform of 
connectivity and collaborative computing.  And do you know what else was 
a topic at OSBC?  If the Internet is "the" computer, open XML is the API.

Just when you thought the only decision you had to make was how to cover 
your quarterly check to Redmond, someone comes along and complicates 
things.   Bastardos!

~ge~

Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
John W. Kennedy a écrit :
Gary Edwards wrote:

And what do they do with OpenDocument?  They mark it acceptable as an
open standard "pending" ratification by OASIS.


Why is OpenDocument the only file format in the Commonwealth's list
that requires ratification by an Open Standards Group?   Yeah.  You
got it.  It's a set up.  And Open Source is the target.

Ummm  I'm no expert on the day-to-day politics of Open Source, but
it seems to me they have the rather obvious justification that until
OASIS (or somebody, but OASIS is the one at bat now) ratifies
OpenDocument, it isn't any sort of standard in the first place.
Sometimes a "pending" is just a "pending".

But then neither are the other proposed formats, except they somehow
don't have to pass the same test to be considered "standards"

Yes, but at least the Microsoft standards are Microsoft standards. 
OpenDocument, until OASIS acts, isn't /anybody's/ standard -- not even 
OOo's, since OOo 2.0 is in beta.

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Approval of OpenDocument v1.0 as OASIS Standard

[Gary Edwards]

This message was recently sent out to all OASIS Members from Mary McRae, 
OASIS Administration:

OASIS members:
We are pleased to announce that the Open Document Format for Office 
Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0 Specification has been approved as an 
OASIS Standard. The submission of the approved standard can be found at [1].

Congratulations to the TC, and the community of implementers, developers 
and users who have brought the work successfully to culmination.

Mary
[1] http://lists.oasis-open.org/archives/tc-announce/200504/msg6.html
---
Mary P McRae
Manager of TC Administration, OASIS
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]  
web: www.oasis-open.org


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Article: Why Google Scares Bill Gates - FORTUNE

[Gary Edwards]

If you have not yet seen this, it's worth a read.  Very informative with 
some interesting speculation.  Including the possibility of Google 
purchasing StarOffice as part of the Google Desktop threat to Microsoft. 

Fortune Magazine:
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles/0,15114,1050065-1,00.html
~ge~
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Article: Why Google Scares Bill Gates - FORTUNE

[Gary Edwards]

If you have not yet seen this, it's worth a read.  Very informative with
some interesting speculation.  Including the possibility of Google
purchasing StarOffice as part of the Google Desktop threat to Microsoft.
Fortune Magazine:
http://www.fortune.com/fortune/technology/articles/0,15114,1050065-1,00.html
~ge~
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] OASIS Members Approve OpenDocument as OASIS Standard

[Gary Edwards]

--- Begin Message ---
Members Approve OpenDocument as OASIS Standard

IBM, Sun Microsystems, and Others Develop Royalty-Free Standard for Office 
Applications Document Format

BOSTON, MA, USA; 23 MAY 2005 -- OASIS, the international e-business standards 
consortium, today announced that its members have
approved the Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0 
as an OASIS Standard, a status that signifies the
highest level of ratification. OpenDocument provides a royalty-free, XML-based 
file format that covers features required by text,
spreadsheets, charts, and graphical documents.

"XML doesn't always mean open. You can hide a lot in a file format. 
OpenDocument represents an opportunity to ensure truly open file
formats for productivity applications, which is why it will receive the 
enthusiastic support of public sector steering organizations
on a global basis," commented James Governor, principal analyst at RedMonk. 
"The participation of enterprises in vertical
industries, such as aerospace, will also ensure adoption in the private sector. 
One key to success will be the royalty free status
of the spec; there are no financial penalties associated with developing to it."

"Office productivity applications and the documents they create are key to 
today's knowledge economy. Information critical to the
long term functioning of any organization is stored in the spreadsheets, 
presentations, and text documents its employees create,"
said Michael Brauer of Sun Microsystems, chair of the OASIS OpenDocument 
Technical Committee. "Today, for the first time in the
25-year history of office applications, such documents can be stored in an 
open, standardized, and vendor-independent format."


OpenDocument provides a single XML schema for text, spreadsheets, charts, and 
graphical documents. It makes use of existing
standards, such as HTML, SVG, XSL, SMIL, XLink, XForms, MathML, and the Dublin 
Core, wherever possible. OpenDocument has been
designed as a package concept, enabling it to be used as a default file format 
for office applications with no increase in file size
or loss of data integrity. 

"OpenDocument is a fine example of an OASIS Standard that originated in and 
continues to be endorsed by the open source community,"
noted Patrick Gannon, president and CEO of OASIS. "The work of OpenOffice.org 
was submitted to OASIS in 2002 by Sun Microsystems
with the approval of the OpenOffice.org community for advancement under 
royalty-free terms, so that it would be freely available to
developers and users of any office software application. Now that OpenDocument 
has been approved as an OASIS Standard, we look
forward to its robust use by the many organizations and governments from around 
the world that have been calling for an open, safe,
standardized schema for office documents." Gannon referenced OpenDocument 
implementations in software from Novell, OpenOffice.org,
Stellent, and Sun Microsystems, as well as several other open source projects, 
as evidence of significant support in the
marketplace.

Future plans for the OASIS OpenDocument Technical Committee include extending 
the standard to encompass additional areas of
applications and users, as well as adapting it to incorporate ongoing 
developments in office applications. All those interested in
advancing this work, including governments, open source initiatives, 
educational institutions, and software providers, are
encouraged to participate in the Committee. OASIS hosts an open mail list for 
public comment and the opendocument-dev mailing list
for exchanging information on implementing the standard.

 
Support for OpenDocument OASIS Standard

"IBM recognizes the importance of a standards-based document format. Use of 
open, non-proprietary formats will facilitate seamless
collaboration between vendors, customers and partners and ensure the 
maintenance of corporate and government knowledge," said Karla
Norsworthy, vice president, Software Standards, IBM. "IBM supports the OASIS 
OpenDocument formats, and we believe the
standardization is a major accomplishment in an important area."

"Sun believes in the power of open standards to enhance business productivity 
and to stimulate innovation by preserving the
intellectual property rights of content creators," said Tim Bray, Technology 
Director at Sun Microsystems. "Sun is a founding member
of the OASIS OpenDocument Technical Committee, and Sun's StarOffice 8 
productivity suite, based on the OpenOffice.org project, uses
OpenDocument as its default file format."

About OASIS:
OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards) is 
a 
not-for-profit, international consortium that drives the development, 
convergence, and adoption of e-business standards. Members
themselves set the OASIS technical agenda, using a lightweight, open process 
expressly designed to promote industry consensus and
unite disparate efforts. The consortium produces open st

[discuss] Christian and The Giant Peach

[Gary Edwards]

Determined Open Source evangelist and advocate Christian Einfeldt has 
struck again, this time taking a bite out of the giant peach that is the 
incredible future of Internet computing.


Mad Penguin has published Christian's latest effort:  *Open source: 
where we are now. where we are going 
 


*Great work Christian!
~ge~


The George Gilder Telecosm Series: * * 
*Feasting on 
the Giant Peach* 

[discuss] Re: [xml-dev] OASIS Members Approve OpenDocument as OASIS Standard

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Sander,

This is the official OASIS Press Release for OpenDocument.  Articles are 
starting to pop up all over, most of which borrow heavily from the OASIS 
quotes.


I thought the comment from OASIS president Patrick Gannon was 
exceptional.  He fully credits OpenOffice.org, and reaches out to Open 
Source Communities in the process.  An important thing for him to do.


Since the release of the new OASIS IPR policy he has been frantically 
treading water defending the royalty fee and patent encumbered 
allowances of the new IPR against the rising global storm of angry 
warnings coming from Open Standards and Open Source advocates.


The new OASIS IPR policy provides for three license models, only one of 
which can be considered truly "Open", "Transparent" and "Unencumbered". 
  An Open Standards license used to be default for OASIS efforts, and 
even though there were ways to introduce royalty and patent 
encumbrances, the process was incredibly difficult, with many stages of 
review and confirmation. Now "Open Standard" is just one of three 
possible options, and it no longer is the default.


To make matters worse, the IPR goes further, allowing TC"s (technical 
committees) to change from one license to another, at any time, through 
a simple majority vote of the TC to change the Charter.  It's entirely 
possible for an OASIS Open Standard to have been in the marketplace for 
ten years or more, and quietly have it's license model changed to allow 
for patent and royalty restrictions.  Under these conditions an OASIS 
Open Standard is only open as long as the open standards advocates can 
hold their majority on the TC.


Sad to say, but with the new OASIS IPR, the OASIS OpenDocument may be 
the only open standards effort that is guaranteed to remain open - 
thanks to some prescient foresight on the part of Sun lawyers when the 
file format was first submitted to OASIS.


Still, it's nice to see Patrick Gannon recognizing the problem, and 
using the occasion of the OpenDocument ratification to mend some fences.


~ge~



Sander Vesik wrote:

--- Gary Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



From: "Carol Geyer" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>


To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Mon, 23 May 2005 09:35:37 -0400
Subject: [announce] Members Approve OpenDocument as OASIS Standard

Members Approve OpenDocument as OASIS Standard




WOOO!!! Cool :)

Sander

.sigless



___ 
How much free photo storage do you get? Store your holiday 
snaps for FREE with Yahoo! Photos http://uk.photos.yahoo.com


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] OASIS: Meaningful open standards or mirage?

[Gary Edwards]

Hey, another good article that comes on the heels of the OASIS 
OpenDocument press release.  In this article OOo member and renown open 
source opinion maker Sam Hiser takes a big bite out of the controversial 
OASIS IPR policy.



 OASIS: Meaningful open standards or mirage?

http://software.newsforge.com/software/05/05/24/1526226.shtml?tid=93

~ge~

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Microsoft's EU Proposal a Blow to Open Source

[Gary Edwards]

eWeek has published a series of articles covering the recent anti trust 
settlement between Microsoft and the European Union.  To me the most 
interesting piece is an article titled, "Microsoft's EU Proposal a Blow 
to Open Source".  The article can be found at:

http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1759,1824675,00.asp

Under the current terms of the Microsoft proposal, the author of the 
article, Matthew Broersma has got it right.  It's an enormous blow to 
Open Source.  

Measures imposed on Microsoft by the European Commission last year were 
meant to restore competition in the workgroup server market.  Microsoft 
was forced to come up with a means of disclosing important protocols and 
interfaces that connect the MS desktop productivity environment to MS 
servers and MS devices.  The plan Microsoft came up with is a RAND 
(Reasonable and Non Discriminatory) license for access to these 
communications and connectivity protocols and interfaces.  Price and 
licensing restrictions effectively excludes Open Source access.  

Even though Open Source alternatives are the only meaningful competition 
left, the Microsoft juggernaut having crushed any and all profit 
oriented corporate efforts, the European Commission is nevertheless at a 
loss to do anything other than accept this measure of Redmond magnanimity.  

But fear not.   There is a solution, which, as measure of our own 
magnanimity, i'll call the "Spyglass Model of Fair Access and 
Licensing".  The model attempts to provide some structure and meaning to 
the meaningless RAND.  What's "reasonable and non discriminatory" to 
Microsoft turns out to be a catch-22 highway to oblivion for everyone 
else.  To be "reasonable" we need to have a solid marker, reflecting the 
marketplace, against which access rights to communications essentials 
can be "reasonably" distributed.  Let me try to explain.


Clearly we need a solution to the problem of providing fair and 
equitable access to these critically important interfaces and 
protocols.  Without access there can be no open market interoperability 
worth a competitive damn.


Lucky for us that Microsoft has already come up with a solution that has 
worked very well for them in the past, and if applied to the current 
situation would preserve the competitiveness of open source 
alternatives.  Let's call it the "Spyglass Model".


Remember Spyglass?  Faced with the prospect of the Netscape Browser 
totally taking over the Internet, and having no expertise to write their 
own response, Microsoft turned to Mosaic Browser expert Spyglass.  The 
deal was simple. Spyglass writes a competitive browser for Microsoft, 
and Microsoft pays them a percentage of every browser sold. A win win 
for everyone.  

Microsoft then proceeded to bolt the Spyglass browser into every Windows 
distro.  Since there was no break down of the Windows bundle into 
specific charges for specific components like the browser, there was no 
requirement to reimburse Spyglass for Herculean effort in providing 
Microsoft with a competitive browser.  Funny how MS Office was handled 
differently, but nevertheless managed to ship bundled with most 
distributions.   

What's good for the goose is good for the gander.  I think the EU can 
solve the interoperability problems between MS desktops and competitive 
servers and services by following the Spyglass model and putting some 
structure to the RAND licensing model Microsoft has proposed.  Let 
competitors needing totally open, clear and transparent access to these 
critically important protocols and interfaces pay Microsoft according to 
what they charge for components utilizing these interfaces in their 
distributions.  Let the regulators audit Microsoft to make certain they 
provide "all" interfaces and protocols.


It's been more than a year since Microsoft came to similar terms with 
the USA Courts regarding competitive access rights to the same 
interfaces and protocols.  Since then only seven companies have come up 
with the booty to purchase MS RAND access rights.  And they did so with 
no guarantee that the interfaces and protocols they were provided with 
represented the whole enchilada.  For all these seven know, they could 
have purchased themselves into second class competitiveship for aeon's 
to come.  The Microsoft way has long been to provide one set of 
protocols and interfaces to third parties, and reserve another, secret 
and enhanced set for themselves. Why should they give up a proven, 
battle tested business practice guaranteed to fill the coffers?


The MS desktop productivity environment has a 93% plus market dominance. 
What server, device or Internet service doesn't need access to this, the 
most dominant computational interface the digital world knows?  The 
desktop interface is how most information workers access information 
systems.  And even as devices continue to rise in their computational 
and information access capabilities, interoperability with MS desktops 
remains cri

[discuss] How to standardize Spreadsheet formulas?

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Marco,

There has been much discussion at the OpenDocument TC regarding the 
"OpenFormula Project", initiated by David Wheeler in October of 2004.  
This was a concern for the EU, and lucky for us David took up the challenge.


Dr. Nathaniel Borenstein, one of the IBM representatives who recently 
joined the OpenDoc TC, is also very interested in the OpenFormula 
Project.  David has posted many discussions of OpenFormula to the OASIS 
OpenDoc public comment list serve.  Your might want to check these 
conversations out.  He has also posted a rough draft of the OpenFormula 
spec.


It is at:
http://www.dwheeler.com/openformula/openformula.pdf
or
http://www.dwheeler.com/openformula/openformula.sxw

Other stuff is at:
http://www.dwheeler.com/openformula/

A sample clip of David's discussion:
  "I believe that OpenDocument's release should NOT 
depend on the completeness of OpenFormula - send OpenDocument on to its 
next stage when you're ready!"


"The only issue I have with OpenDocument related to formulas is that I 
think anim:formula and draw:formula should be changed
to use ";" as their function parameter separators. If the OpenDocument 
spec is changed to make ";" the separator,
then they become compatible with table:formula, and I think that'd be a 
good idea."


--- David A. Wheeler 


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Why Microsoft Passed on OpenDoc XML

[Gary Edwards]

Stephen O'Grady of Redmonk, has an excellent commentary about MS XML and 
the OASIS OpenDocument XML.  He quotes Erwin Tenhumberg 
  
to make his case.  It's short but well worth reading.  Especially since 
the blog was picked up by ZDnet, and further commented on by Bob Sutor 
of IBM.


O'Grady Tecosystem: * "**Microsoft Office Open XML Formats: "We Already 
Got One"* "http://www.redmonk.com/sogrady/archives/000732.html


ZDnet:  *"** Office 12: Why Microsoft passed on OpenDocument XML format"
*http://blogs.zdnet.com/Research/?p=202&part=rss&tag=feed&subj=zdblog*
*
Bob Sutor: *"**Open standards, open source, open minds, open opportunities"*
http://www-106.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog.jspa?blog=384

[discuss] LinuxWorld in San Francisco

[Gary Edwards]

This is amazing!  A few hours ago i was on the phone with Ryan Singer,
the OOo west coast marketing manager, as he excitedly told me about an
agreement he had just reached with Debian to host an OOo pod.  Two hours
later that information shows up in a Ziff Davis blog page as though it
was a highlight of the show.

http://blogs.zdnet.com/open-source/?p=404

Great job Ryan!  I'll see you at the Debian booth on Tuesday,

~ge~

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Hiser comments on MassGov ETRM doc

[Gary Edwards]

OpenDocument expert and long time OpenOffice.org member Sam Hiser has 
responded to Massachusetts request for comments. You really should read 
his excellent summation of these recent world changing events:


http://lxer.com/module/newswire/stories/viewstory.php?rid=42705

Although Sam says it all, it really is incumbent on all those who value 
Open Standards, Open XML technologies, and the wonder that is OpenDocument.


OpenDocument is more than just a cornerstone of our Open Internet 
future.  It is uniquely OpenOffice.org's gift to mankind.  A gift that 
has now been taken up cause célèbre by so many systems vendors, solution 
providers and application builders, that Microsoft has been left near 
isolated and steaming with rage. 

Even if the only thing you do is offer Massachusetts your 
congratulations and support, do so.  They have done a courageous thing.  
If they are successful, the flood gates are sure to open.  There isn't 
an enterprises, organization, or SMB anywhere in the world that isn't 
right now contemplating  moving their information infrastructure to an 
Open Internet foundation.  Usually this means consideration of SOA best 
practices. SOA is an approach for integrating disparate  "non Internet 
ready" systems and computer resources into  loosely coupled alignments 
where XML rules, and information flows unimpeded between applications, 
data silos, and transaction centers - regardless of platform specific 
bindings. 

Please read the Massachusetts SOA strategy.  As Sam so aptly describes 
this plan, it is about as perfect a blueprint for migrating to an Open 
Internet - SOA infrastructure as we've yet see.  Well worth your time! 
And many thanks to Sam, especially for the eloquence of his 
comprehensive response.


~ge~

[discuss] Re: AMAAAAAAAZING! But suggestion/request for a feature...

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Ned,

What a great comment!  Thanks for taking the time to express our 
opinions and appreciation. Lots of time and effort went into OOo v2.0, 
and as a fellow OOo user, i agree with you completely.  It is beyond 
awesome.  The OOo developers are taking on what Microsoft claims to be 
the greatest team of programmers ever assembled.  They claim to have 
spared no expense.  Yet,  as proof again that mountains of money can't 
buy or compete with that unique combination of expertise and passion OOo 
is so rich in, i think OOo v2.0 is going to hit MS as they have never 
been hit before.  Welcome to the community!  Thanks for the kind and 
considerate comments.  I'm sure the tireless and hard working OOo 
developers appreciate your consideration.  and hey, let me say that you 
certainly know how best to make a suggestion - request :)


~ge~

Ned Milburn wrote:

Hi Open Office Team,

You guys all did an AMAZING job of the Beta 2 version of Open Office!!!

Really, seriously, AMAZING!!!

Thanks a million.

I have a suggestion/request for a feature.  I would like to be able to 
tile the page background to the edge of the page while keeping the text 
margins in tact.  As it is now, the incredibly amazing graphics you 
included can only be set to the edge of the page if the text margins are 
also set to the edge of the page.


I am not a programmer, but I can't imagine it would be too hard to add 
some small amount of code to allow for the added flexibility of this 
feature.


I just relocated from Japan, and I am still busy searching for full time 
work, but I would possibly be interested in contributing to the Japanese 
version of Open Office.  Are there any text files (help files, and user 
guide probably) that still need to be translated to Japanese?


I will give the software a full going over (although I only usually use 
the word processor) and give any more feedback I have.


Thank you all SO SO SO much for such a fine job!

Better than Word Perfect, Lotus, MSWord, and the whole lot!!!

- Ned Milburn.


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Breaking News: Massachusetts mandated use of OpenDocument is FINAL

[Gary Edwards]

IBM's Bob Sutor has published the news at his blog:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog_comments.jspa?blog=384&entry=95750&ca=drs-bl

~ge~

Whiskey for my men and beer for our horses,
   It's been another good day fighting evil forces!

[discuss] Re: Breaking News: Massachusetts mandated use of OpenDocument is FINAL

[Gary Edwards]

Gary Edwards wrote:
> IBM's Bob Sutor has published the news at his blog:
> 
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog_comments.jspa?blog=384&entry=95750&ca=drs-bl 


>

This is really good! Although final migration won't be complete until 
Jan 2007, all acquisitions of new office applications must support 
OpenDoc from this date, September 23, 2005, forward.  Let the OOo 
downloads begin!  Brace the mirrors!  Prepare the community user lists 
for action!


From the final report and requirements mandate:

Any acquisition of new office applications must support the 
OpenDocument format natively.


   Agencies should begin to evaluate office applications that support 
the OpenDocument specification to migrate from applications that use 
proprietary document formats. As of January 1, 2007 all agencies within 
the Executive Department will be required to:


  1. Use office applications that provide conformance with the 
OpenDocument format, and
  2. Configure the applications to save office documents in 
OpenDocument format by default.




>
> ~ge~
>
> Whiskey for my men and beer for our horses,
>It's been another good day fighting evil forces!
>
>

[discuss] Re: Breaking News: Massachusetts mandated use of OpenDocument is FINAL

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Rich,

In October of 2004, following the EU announcement that OpenDoc was the 
only specification to meet their Open Standard - Open XML file format 
requirements, David Wheeler began the OpenFormula Project as a subset of 
OpenDocument.  It's a massive job that has long troubled the 
productivity environment industry, but he was willing to take it on. 
Somebody has to solve that problem once and for all.


When IBM joined the OpenDoc TC in May of 2005, they put two developers 
on the OpenFormula Project; effectively taking over David's great effort.


Thank you for pointing out that at any time Morten Widener or anyone 
else with an interest in the OpenDoc Spreadsheet work could have 
contacted us with criticisms or contributions.  If it was such a great 
concern to Morten, he could have even posted his problems and solutions 
to the OOo Spreadsheet project discussion list.  Sadly i think his real 
problem is that of envy.  But that's just my reading of his complaint.


Open Source efforts need to stick together, even if they compete for 
mind share.  KDE - KOffice is an incredible contributor to OpenDocument. 
 So was Corel, and so many others.  Now IBM and Adobe have stepped up 
and are taking on much of the load involved in pushing OpenDoc into the 
next generation of collaborative computing over the Open Internet.  The 
application developers on the TC routinely exchange explanations as to 
how they do things and why they chose the methods they did.  It would 
perhaps be a beneficial experience for Morten to join an Open Standards 
group and see up close and personal what it's like to work on a project 
that everyone understands is more important than any particular 
implementation.


~ge~

Rich wrote:
this is really great, but i have seen lately some complaints about od. 
most of them raise false arguments, but there are some that i haven't 
seen a response so have no idea how significant they are.


you have informed people about various aspects of od and it is very 
important to oo.org, so i hope you could clarify this issue somewhat :)


http://blogs.gnome.org/view/mortenw/2005/06/16/0

of course, he probably should have raised these points during creation 
of od specification, but still - is there a problem ? if so, what could 
be the solution ?


Gary Edwards wrote:


IBM's Bob Sutor has published the news at his blog:
http://www-128.ibm.com/developerworks/blogs/dw_blog_comments.jspa?blog=384&entry=95750&ca=drs-bl 


~ge~

Whiskey for my men and beer for our horses,
   It's been another good day fighting evil forces!


-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: Breaking News: Massachusetts mandated use of OpenDocument is FINAL

[Gary Edwards]

Chad Smith wrote:

On 9/23/05, Gary Edwards <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:



Let the OOo
downloads begin! Brace the mirrors! Prepare the community user lists
for action!




Yeah, right, okay. It's one state. And it's not like it is everybody in the
state - it's just people doing business with the state. So, maybe a couple
thousand downloads over the next year and a half? I don't think we need to
worry about being slashdotted. We will barely notice a blip.

--
- Chad Smith



Hi Chad,

I guess that explains why Microsoft has pulled out all the stops and is 
threatening Massachusetts with law suits.  If you had taken the time to 
listen to the recording of the final public session, you might have 
heard the Microsoft representatives indirectly threaten Peter Quinn and 
Eric Kriss, when they said Microsoft was in discussions with State 
Senators and Representatives.  Maybe you missed Microsoft's push on the 
Governor of Massachusetts?  Maybe you've missed the all out FUD attack 
Microsoft has launched against the OpenDoc, Sun, and IBM?  Maybe you 
should explain to Chairman Bill that these events don't amount to a hill 
of beans and his sweating is all for nothing?  Sure would make life 
easier for everyone else if he agreed with you Chad.


Seriously, there's a lot more going on here than you seem to realize. 
It's not worth my time to explain things to you, but here's a copy of a 
recent exchange i had with Eduardo Gutentag, head of Sun's Standards 
Group, and current OASIS Chairman of the Board:


Hi Eduardo,

Thanks for responding.  Your explanation makes sense, but the shills and 
lackeys are off and running wild with this new discovery that “Sun has 
secret patents on ODF”.   Yes, they went full throttle, zero to sixty in 
under four seconds.


By next week this latest conspiracy theory will likely go the way of 
other myths that got some noise, and then into a vast echo chamber that 
otherwise intelligent people reference in shamelessly self serving ways 
to justify the next conspiracy theory.  I can hear the deafening refrain 
now, "There were so many reports that Sun had patents on ODF and that 
it's not really open, that you have to stop and think".


I wrote a response to  Brian Jones, and sent it to PJ for review.  But 
the truth is, today is the first time i ever had to think through the 
licensing issues.  The interesting thing is that it's easy to circle 
false arguments, and set them spinning, even without having a clue as to 
what i'm talking about :)  At the end of the day they will become the 
fateful victims of their own wishful and self serving exuberance.   Such 
is life when you have no sense of integrity, trust and truth.  And don't 
understand that when push comes to shove, trust and truth are the only 
things that matter.  Push came to shove in Massachusetts, and everyone 
got to see, up close and personal, who they really are.  Not a pretty 
sight.  +1 Open Standards.  +1 Open Source.  Transparency rules.


Your arguments though have the truth of being there.   Would you mind if 
PJ published your comments?  I know that's asking a lot, especially 
since there's far more at stake than needing to respond to the lies and 
deceits of the MS Office 12 gang.  But your response is clean, clear, 
and to the point.  Groklaw does have one loud and booming voice.  And PJ 
is the kind of do gooder who doesn't like FUD.  She usually does an 
excellent job of exposing and slamming away lies, deceits and distortions.


There is the distinct probability that things will get worse.  I for one 
am quite surprised by the heavy handed, uncompromising take no prisoners 
ferocity Microsoft has shown regarding the Massachusetts decision.  ODF 
though is a silver bullet, and the shot Eric Kriss and Peter Quinn took 
at all proprietary, platform and application bound file formats found 
it's mark.  Finally.


The day before the final decision was made, i had a chance to speak at 
length with Peter Quinn.  They were hoping against hope that Microsoft 
would respect their decision and make the necessary accommodations to 
provide OpenDocument files. Sadly it was not to be, but for sure 
Microsoft was given every consideration. Deserved or not.


Peter did ask if i would participate in his panel discussion session at 
the upcoming NACIO conference in San Diego. They expect excellent 
attendance from every state. He's trying to get someone from Microsoft, 
but so far they are refusing to participate. So i asked him if it would 
be okay if showed up with a few hundred OpenOffice.org CD's to pass out. 
He told me i would need more than that :) Apparently the line behind 
Massachusetts is both long and ready.


I also asked if he and Eric would kindly autograph my copy of the OASIS 
OpenDocument v 1.0 specification. He said of course, but then asked if i 
could get him a copy autographed by al

[discuss] Demand ODF!

[Gary Edwards]

Hi all,

There is an interesting interview at ZDnet with MS honcho, Stephen 
Sinofsky, “*Office beta coming in November includes support for PDF*”


http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9593-5887827.html

The subtitle is, “*Has the battle over document file formats forced 
Microsoft to blink?*


There is of course lots of pathetic blather, deception, mis 
representation and out right lying going on here, but Sinofsky makes one 
very interesting claim. He says that there are 120,000 requests per 
month for PDF functionality in MS Office. He also says that there are no 
demands for ODF.


I wonder how it is that he can discount the demand made by the 80,000 
Windows desktops owned by the Commonwealth of Massachusetts that 
Microsoft support ODF. Since Sinofsky indicates, based on the threshold 
he set for PDF adoption, we need 120,000 demands for ODF before 
Microsoft will concede to our demands, is there anyone else willing to 
join the demand line for ODF? If Microsoft wants to position themselves 
as a company that responds to the demands of the marketplace, let us 
shout loudly. Start by posting a comment to the Zdnet talk back. Put it 
right in Sinofsky's face.


~ge~

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] OASIS OpenDocument Certification Call

[Gary Edwards]

The OASIS OpenDocument XML file format specification has passed through 
the public comment phase of the OASIS standardization process.  A call 
went out to interested vendors and computational consumers to certify 
successful implementations of the OpenDoc specification.

It would be nice if IBM and Novell would similarly submit an official 
certification :)  I think we have to have three certified 
implementations before the specification can be put to vote before the 
OASIS general membership.  From there, the specification will go to ISO 
for further ratification.

Note also that OASIS has recently changed their IPR Policy (Intellectual 
Property Rights Policy - link and text of policy below).

~ge~
~~
*This message from KOffice just came through the OASIS OpenDocument TC 
(Technical Committee) forum:*

I, David Faure, certify that the KOffice project 
(http://www.koffice.org) is successfully using the Open Document Format 
for Office Applications (OpenDocument) 1.0 specification consistently 
with the OASIS IPR Policy.

- --
David Faure, [EMAIL PROTECTED], sponsored by Trolltech to work on KDE,
Konqueror (http://www.konqueror.org), and KOffice (http://www.koffice.org).
_ _ _
Note:  David serves on the OASIS OpenDoc TC, representing KOffice and KDE
~~
A few days earlier, a similar message from Sun came through the same forum:
-*--- Original Message *
*Subject: Use of OpenDocument by Sun Microsystems*
Date: Fri, 11 Feb 2005 18:33:45 +0100
From: Michael Bemmer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC: Michael Brauer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mary,
I, Michael Bemmer, certify that Sun Microsystems is successfully using 
the Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) 1.0 
specification consistently with the OASIS IPR Policy.

Michael Bemmer
Director SW Eng. StarOffice, Sun Microsystems
~~~
*Subject:  OASIS IPR Policy Link:*
http://www.oasis-open.org/who/intellectualproperty.php

While the current IPR policy will be replaced by a new one mid of April, 
the current policy is effective since January 2000, so you may have seen 
it already when you joined OASIS. To make sure that we meet above 
requirement, you will find a copy of the current OASIS IPR policy below.

Best regards
Michael
===
*Legacy OASIS Intellectual Property Rights (IPR) Policy*
*OASIS.IPR.1. General Policy*
In all matters of intellectual property rights and procedures, the 
intention is to benefit the public at large, while respecting the 
legitimate rights of others.
*
OASIS.IPR.2 Confidentiality Obligations*

No contribution that is subject to any requirement of confidentiality or 
any restriction on its dissemination may be considered in any part of 
the OASIS Standards Process, and there must be no assumption of any 
confidentiality obligation with respect to any such contribution. No 
submission should be made on the basis of an assumed confidentiality 
obligation or restriction on dissolution.

*OASIS.IPR.3. Rights and Permissions*
In the course of standards work, OASIS receives contributions in various 
forms and from many persons. To best facilitate the dissemination of 
these contributions, it is necessary to understand any intellectual 
property rights (IPR) relating to the contributions.
*
OASIS.IPR.3.1. All Contributions*

By submission of a contribution, each person actually submitting the 
contribution is deemed to agree to the following terms and conditions on 
his own behalf, on behalf of the organization (if any) he represents and 
on behalf of the owners of any proprietary rights in the contribution. 
Where a submission identifies contributors in addition to the 
contributor(s) who provide the actual submission, the actual 
submitter(s) represent that each other named contributor was made aware 
of and agreed to accept the same terms and conditions on his own behalf, 
on behalf of any organization he may represent and any known owner of 
any proprietary rights in the contribution.

1.Some works (e.g. works of the U.S. Government) are not subject to 
copyright. However, to the extent that the submission is or may be 
subject to copyright, the contributor, the organization he represents 
(if any) and the owners of any proprietary rights in the contribution, 
grant an unlimited perpetual, non-exclusive, royalty-free, world-wide 
right and license to OASIS under any copyrights in the contribution. 
This license includes the right to copy, publish and distribute the 
contribution in any way, and to prepare derivative works that are based 
on or incorporate all or part of the contribution, the license to such 
derivative works to be of the same scope as the license of the original 
contribution.

2.The contributor acknowledges that OASIS has no duty to publish or 
otherwise use or disseminate any contribution.

3.The contri

[discuss] The Future Unfolds

[Gary Edwards]

I just got this link from a friend and it really gave me pause.  It's a 
link to a flash presentation created by the Museum of Media History.  
Very thought provoking.

http://www.broom.org/epic/
~ge~
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Fight over 'forms' clouds future of Net applications

[Gary Edwards]

There is an interesting article at ZDnet discussing the battle over next 
generation forms.  According to the article, confusion reigns. 

http://news.zdnet.com/2100-9588_22-5581106.html
One problem is a W3C splinter group that has broken from the W3C's XForm 
initiative.  This group includes browser makers Apple Computer, the 
Mozilla Foundation and Opera Software.  They call their effort WHAT-WG, 
or the Web Hypertext Application Technology Working Group 
.

Another problem is that Microsoft and Macromedia also have heavy weight 
proprietary efforts underway.

One quote in particular seems to sum things up:
"At the moment it's mass confusion," said Dharmesh Mistry, chief 
technology officer of Newbury, U.K.-based EdgeIPK, which builds 
forms-based applications for clients in the financial services industry. 
"The W3C is saying the answer is XForms. Microsoft is saying it's XAML. 
Macromedia is saying its Flash MX. And Mozilla is saying it's XUL. If 
you look at it from the point of view of an organization, you're not 
going to say, 'We're going to write our rich Internet applications in 
one language and the forms in XForms.'"

What the article doesn't cover is the work going on at OpenOffice.org 
and OASIS regarding XForms.  Good article though.  Even if they missed 
entirely the fact that by accepting the OASIS OpenDocument specification 
as meeting their future file format requirements, the EU is endorsing 
XForms.  In fact, they requested it!  Novell Office, IBM WorkPlace, Sun 
StarOffice, and even Adobe claim support of OpenDoc, which is to say 
they support XForms too.  My guess is that governments standardizing on 
XForms will have a profound impact on all related commerce.  Including 
the offerings of information system vendors and provisioner.  How did 
they miss this?

~ge~
-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: Fight over 'forms' clouds future of Net applications

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Jacob,
Check out this December 23, 2004 post in the XML developer forum:
http://xml.openoffice.org/servlets/ReadMsg?listName=dev&msgNo=2214
The post is from Daniel Volgelheim, who serves on both the OASIS 
OpenDocument XML file format TC, and the W3C XForms TC.  You'll see from 
the above link that Daniel has XForms operational in the recent OOo 
beta.  Baring an unforeseen show stopper, there is every expectation 
that OOo 2.0 will ship with XForms.  This week there were some recent 
adjustments to the XForms namespace addressing in the OASIS OpenDocument 
specification, but these were minor changes.

You can also view a pdf of Daniel's October OOo Conference presentation 
concerning the OOo - OASIS XForms implementation:
http://marketing.openoffice.org/ooocon2004/presentations/friday/vogelheim_XForms.pdf

Of course, you could also contact Daniel directly :)
Daniel Vogelheim <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hope this helps,
~ge~
Jacob Floyd wrote:
[snip]
What the article doesn't cover is the work going on at OpenOffice.org 
and OASIS regarding XForms.  Good article though.  Even if they missed
entirely the fact that by accepting the OASIS OpenDocument specification
as meeting their future file format requirements, the EU is endorsing
XForms.  In fact, they requested it!  Novell Office, IBM WorkPlace, Sun
StarOffice, and even Adobe claim support of OpenDoc, which is to say
they support XForms too.  My guess is that governments standardizing on
XForms will have a profound impact on all related commerce.  Including
the offerings of information system vendors and provisioner.  How did
they miss this?

~ge~

Woa Nelly!
Did you just say that OOo _already supports_ the XForms standard?!!
Brilliant. Where's the documentation that tells how to interface with
the components that understand the XForms, what project does this lie
under, does it rely in any manner shape or form on VCL?
Thanks!
Jacob

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]

[discuss] Re: filming community giving out OOo 2.0

[Gary Edwards]

Hi Christian,
You didn't give a time or date?  And what was that bit about the rain?
~ge~
Christian Einfeldt wrote:
Hi,
I thought that it might be interesting for the Digital Tipping Point 
film for us to film a group of us in San Francisco giving out OOo 
2.0 CDs.  I think that I might be able to get a few notable locals 
to join us, say for example, Brian Behlendorf to name one.  I also 
am thinking of a local politician who claims to be in favor of 
FLOSS.  

At any rate, I know that I personally plan to go to Powell and 
Market Streets in San Francisco, which is sort of our little 
version of Times Square.  There is a cable car turn around there.  
it is also weather proof, because there is a shopping mall right 
across the street and the subway, too, in case it rains (not 
likely).  

So if anyone is in the San Francisco Bay Area at that time, and 
thinks that this would be fun, please let me know.  This also might 
be a good time for folks like Solveig Haugland, etc., to sell 
merchandise and books, which is always a good thing.  

Community is obviously the key theme of our film, and so I'm hoping 
for a good turn out, because we are only going to do a very few 
more shoots, and that is it.  We are also solidly into the editing 
process.  

Christian Einfeldt
415-351-1300

-
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]