Confusion, Standards, and OpenXML

"I hesitate to respond to Andy Updegrove's essay on my point that OpenXML has improved in moving from a closed to a more open environment. It was hardly a clarion call for approval of OpenXML but merely an observation that anti-Microsoft zealots were not giving credit where credit was due. I object to honesty being the first casualty in discussions that involve Microsoft, on the pro/con or government sides.

"I also hesitate to respond because Andy has so deeply mis-stated the nature of the debate that a response will take me far afield from the technical aspects of markup, which are a legitimate subject of discussion on markup standards..."

Download xpdf

Complete Story (PDF file)

Related Stories:

• Danish Unix User Group Files Complaint With EU Commission Against Denmark For Mandating MSOOXML(Feb 27, 2008)
• The OOXML Ballot Resolution(Feb 26, 2008)
• Google: OOXML 'Insufficient and Unnecessary'(Feb 26, 2008)
• Why the OOXML Vote Still Matters: A Proposal to Recognize the Need for "Civil ICT Standards"(Feb 25, 2008)