John F. Sowa wrote:
> Duane and Peter,
> I should have been more precise in making the point.
> I realize that MSFT has participated in OASIS, but
> they did not adopt the open standard or participate
> in getting whatever features they needed into it.
> There is nothing wrong with a company producing their
> own version for compatibility with their own legacy
> systems. But they did not support the OASIS standard
> on an equal footing.
> Furthermore, MSFT tried to get their proprietary version
> made into a standard -- despite the fact that it is bloated
> with garbage designed to support arcane internals of MS
> Office. (01)
This situation in standards adoption seems broader than the Microsoft
case. What makes PDF standardization different ? (02)
> When it became clear that nobody else had any interest
> in supporting the MS version, they "persuaded" [a polite
> euphemism] a large number of countries to become voting
> members of OASIS in order to stuff the ballot box in
> favor of the MS version. Despite that effort, the MS
> version was rejected as an OASIS standards project.
> And now, OASIS is suffering from a bloated roster of
> voting members who have stopped participating. As a
> result, they can't get a quorum for doing other business
> in the overstuffed committees.
> Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
> Subscribe/Config: http://ontolog.cim3.net/mailman/listinfo/ontolog-forum/
> Unsubscribe: mailto:ontolog-forum-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
> Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
> To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Best wishes, (05)
cell: 703-201-9129 (07)
Message Archives: http://ontolog.cim3.net/forum/ontolog-forum/
Shared Files: http://ontolog.cim3.net/file/
Community Wiki: http://ontolog.cim3.net/wiki/
To Post: mailto:ontolog-forum@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx (08)