Microsoft Corp. has failed in its attempt to have its Office Open XML document format fast-tracked straight to the status of an international standard by the International Organization for Standardization. The proposal must now be revised to take into account the negative comments made during the voting process. Microsoft expects that a second vote early next year will result in approval, it said Tuesday.
A proposal must pass two voting hurdles in order to be approved as an ISO standard: it must win the support of two-thirds of voting national standards bodies that participated in work on the proposal, known as P-members, and also of three-quarters of all voting members. OOXML failed on both counts, according to figures provided by Microsoft, and by other sources with knowledge of the voting process. ISO has not yet officially announced the results.
View: The full story
News source: InfoWorld
A proposal must pass two voting hurdles in order to be approved as an ISO standard: it must win the support of two-thirds of voting national standards bodies that participated in work on the proposal, known as P-members, and also of three-quarters of all voting members. OOXML failed on both counts, according to figures provided by Microsoft, and by other sources with knowledge of the voting process. ISO has not yet officially announced the results.
View: The full story News source: InfoWorld
http://news.com.com/British+standards+body..._3-6205797.html
That source also pointed out that
http://www.itwire.com/content/view/14311/53/
This link holds a breakdown of votes by country
I can understand why MS push his own "product" and maybe why other companies are against this, but what's the sense of any standard if only economic importance from one company (or against one company) are in the foreground?
Altough, keep in mind that wich ever company wins, customers are the one that will benefit the most.
Pip'
for one I though the Open Soruce people advocated and wanted competition.. guess not when they got the "upper hand"... though.. that may be themselves deceiving themselves.
OOXML will likely be the dominatiing standard wether it is an ISO or not... the question then of course is... since it will be the dominating standard, wouldn't you rather have it be an open and known ISO standard so that the other office products out there COULD support it, without relying on hacks and stuff. sure it's open anyway for now, but without ISO you never know what will happen in the future...
Open Source apps, and Proprietary Code apps should both be equally able to support Open Standards for file format. Unless there are patent or other issues that would preclude a candidate from being accepted as a "standard".
Hopefully, with the "commented no" votes, the reasons can be worked on.
Open Source apps, and Proprietary Code apps should both be equally able to support Open Standards for file format. Unless there are patent or other issues that would preclude a candidate from being accepted as a "standard".
Hopefully, with the "commented no" votes, the reasons can be worked on.
yeah, that wasn't entirely my point though, my point is that Open source groups have been fighting so hard for OOXML to not be accepted as a standard at all, somethign wich will just return and bite them back.
http://www.noooxml.org/patents
There are doubts that apps written that can read/write Microsoft's OOXML format may run afoul of free distribution under licenses such as the GPL. If so, then surely you agree that a "document standard" should be able to be used equally by all, and not cripple efforts by some competitors to implement. After all, you mentioned competition in your first post, and you would agree that the field should be level in order to have fair competition.
Microsoft is currently raising the "patent liability" specter in regards to Linux (most noteably, Red hat, as their "Get the Facts" campaign has been re-vamped). If they can get OOXML accepted and have it also include a bit of uncertainty regarding legality for use in Linux or other competitors (even closed-source stuff, like Word Perfect, it doesn't have to be "Open Source"
A standard should be very clearly written for equally unrestricted use by all, or it isn't a very good one.
http://www.noooxml.org/patents
There are doubts that apps written that can read/write Microsoft's OOXML format may run afoul of free distribution under licenses such as the GPL. If so, then surely you agree that a "document standard" should be able to be used equally by all, and not cripple efforts by some competitors to implement. After all, you mentioned competition in your first post, and you would agree that the field should be level in order to have fair competition.
Microsoft is currently raising the "patent liability" specter in regards to Linux (most noteably, Red hat, as their "Get the Facts" campaign has been re-vamped). If they can get OOXML accepted and have it also include a bit of uncertainty regarding legality for use in Linux or other competitors (even closed-source stuff, like Word Perfect, it doesn't have to be "Open Source"
A standard should be very clearly written for equally unrestricted use by all, or it isn't a very good one.
From what I gather is the real point here is that OOXML is more pwoerful in the way it allows apps to integrate fucntions into the documents, fucntions that require code that goes beyond the document itself. and currently only MS has these functions built into their office apps.
BUT I also don't see that since the OOXML standard is there other office packaged can't code their own versions of these, they just can't use the un-release MS code, but have to do it thmselves.
I mean the whole gripe is that MS has patented ufucntiosn used by the document format, but lies ousite the document itself.
Open Source apps, and Proprietary Code apps should both be equally able to support Open Standards for file format. Unless there are patent or other issues that would preclude a candidate from being accepted as a "standard".
Hopefully, with the "commented no" votes, the reasons can be worked on.
yeah, that wasn't entirely my point though, my point is that Open source groups have been fighting so hard for OOXML to not be accepted as a standard at all, somethign wich will just return and bite them back.
Actually, if you have a look at those who are fighting it, they aren't opensource companies; most of them are actually closed sourced companies who want a level playing field so that they can compete with Microsoft based on superior product rather than whether or not they have decipher a proprietary file format well.
It means that the standard wasn't fast-tracked, stop interpolating
Anyway, I'm glad Microsoft went with OOXML, even if it was forced. The files are smaller.
Anyway, I'm glad Microsoft went with OOXML, even if it was forced. The files are smaller.
Yeah, its nice to be able to email a buddy a powerpoint which is 1/2 the size
as for why, why not, why should we only had ODF? because it's developed by the mighty Open Source worlds which allways does things better, faster, smaller and more effective.. /sarcasm
as for why, why not, why should we only had ODF? because it's developed by the mighty Open Source worlds which allways does things better, faster, smaller and more effective.. /sarcasm
You seriously need to lurk more.
as for why, why not, why should we only had ODF? because it's developed by the mighty Open Source worlds which allways does things better, faster, smaller and more effective.. /sarcasm
Interesting, what do you call this:
There you go, OpenDocument Spreadsheet.
How about instead of ranting you actually spend some time researching before making an idiot of yourself.
as for why, why not, why should we only had ODF? because it's developed by the mighty Open Source worlds which allways does things better, faster, smaller and more effective.. /sarcasm
Interesting, what do you call this:
There you go, OpenDocument Spreadsheet.
How about instead of ranting you actually spend some time researching before making an idiot of yourself.
Nice namecalling there smart guy, I allready mentioned in my post I wasn't sure about this. but I guess that would require thought beyond wanting to just go namecalling huh ?
Commenting has either been disabled on this article or you are not logged in. Click here to login or register, its free!
Note: Anonymous commenting is disabled in order to keep the quality of responses to a high standard.