Re: OOXML [was Re: GNOME Foundation Board Meeting Minutes :: 7/6/07]

[Behdad Esfahbod <behdad behdad org>]

On Mon, 2007-10-29 at 23:06 -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> On 6/10/07, Luis Villa <luis tieguy org> wrote:
> > On 6/10/07, Jody Goldberg <jody gnome org> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Jun 10, 2007 at 08:18:54PM -0400, Luis Villa wrote:
> > > > On 6/10/07, Glynn Foster <Glynn Foster sun com> wrote:
> > > > > 1) ECMA
> > > > >
> > > > >    We have the opportunity of joining ECMA as a non-profit
> > > > >    member. Jody has expressed an interest in being a representative
> > > > >    for GNOME, and suggested it would also be good to get someone
> > > > >    there from Abiword.
> > > > >
> > > > >    ACTION: Behdad to contact Jody about the ECMA membership application
> > > > >            and find a good candidate from Abiword to attend. Behdad to
> > > > >            work on getting a press release for our membership.
> > > >
> > > > What would our purpose be there?
> > >
> > > As a non-profit we (GNOME) would not have voting privileges.
> > > The membership will serve as a mechanism to allow interested
> > > foundation members to join ECMA committees.  I'm advocating this in
> > > relation to ECMA376/TC45 aka MS OfficeOpen XML.  Committee members
> > > have the ability to request clarifications and suggest improvements
> > > in the text of the specification.  For anyone implementing parts of
> > > this format this is a golden chance to get enough documentation to
> > > facilitate interoperability.
> >
> > Seems reasonable.
> >
> > Of course, I'd be more comfortable with it if we put out a press
> > release saying something to the effect of 'we see no way to avoid
> > implementing OOXML without screwing our users, so we're joining ECMA
> > to make sure it sucks as little as possible. All other things being
> > equal, we'd much prefer to implement a spec that has a much better
> > patent grant, was developed through a more public process, uses open
> > standards like mathml, etc., but since MS has a dominant market
> > position, we don't have much of a choice in the matter.'
> 
> So, uh... this apparently didn't happen, and now we're getting flamed
> (rightfully) for appearing to give a stamp of approval to a deeply
> flawed standard. So... when is the board making this happen?

Right.  I should be blamed for not getting the press release out.  Not
that the flame is correct (it's not) or even would have been prevented
by a press release.  It's not like anybody cared to contact Jody or the
board or foundation before flaming...

> Luis

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/

"Those who would give up Essential Liberty to purchase a little
 Temporary Safety, deserve neither Liberty nor Safety."
        -- Benjamin Franklin, 1759