The BIS LITD 15 Committee has rejected Microsoft's document format OOXML. According to sources, out of 19 members, five of them did not attend the meeting, one of them abstained, five voted in favour of OOXML and the rest voted against. The meeting took place today in Delhi at the BIS office.
Microsoft has released a statement which says, "While we are disappointed with the decision of the BIS LITD 15 committee, we are very encouraged by the support of IT industry players like NASSCOM, TCS, Wipro and Infosys who voted in favour of Open XML becoming an ISO standard. Further, the Indian Government, industry stalwarts and trade bodies have supported multiple standards and technology neutrality. We will therefore continue to work with the Government to address any concerns they may have; and to achieve its stated goal of technology neutrality. We are committed to working towards what is best for the Indian IT industry."
Link: Source
Microsoft has released a statement which says, "While we are disappointed with the decision of the BIS LITD 15 committee, we are very encouraged by the support of IT industry players like NASSCOM, TCS, Wipro and Infosys who voted in favour of Open XML becoming an ISO standard. Further, the Indian Government, industry stalwarts and trade bodies have supported multiple standards and technology neutrality. We will therefore continue to work with the Government to address any concerns they may have; and to achieve its stated goal of technology neutrality. We are committed to working towards what is best for the Indian IT industry."
Link: Source
Oh, and in a related article, How many defects you can find in OOXML.
Microsoft parters. Same **** happened in the Portuguese OOXML technical meetings (worse, actually).
I need Vicodin, and copious amounts of it.
They must think this is the US Congress or something.
This is common in standards... reject... revise... reject.. revise... reject.. aprove...
This is common in standards... reject... revise... reject.. revise... reject.. aprove...
Except it seems that Microsoft (and the ECMA) is ignoring the whole 'revise' step.
This is common in standards... reject... revise... reject.. revise... reject.. aprove...
Except it seems that Microsoft (and the ECMA) is ignoring the whole 'revise' step.
Since when?
This is common in standards... reject... revise... reject.. revise... reject.. aprove...
Except it seems that Microsoft (and the ECMA) is ignoring the whole 'revise' step.
Since when?
Since they've been revising their pockets.
Clearly they are trying to move things along, as they're playing catch-up to formats that have had much longer to mature. Simply using one of those formats is an option in theory, but in practice - not something that Word or Excel could be updated to support in a reasonable amount of time. Imagine if the Office team spent years and came up with an Office 2010 release in which the only new feature was support for a different XML document format. I don't think that would sell particularly well. Further, other formats lack important features used by Office, so you'd have to go through the same process of extending them, and in some cases losing functionality because the standard was developed to target a product with a small feature scope.
Last edited by xpclient on 23 Mar 2008 - 20:23
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.