Fwd: [LINK] and it's Australia's turn on August 9

[Janet Hawtin]

On 7/24/07, Howard Lowndes <lannet at lannet.com.au> wrote:
> Re: Microsoft OOXML and the AS/NZ standards meeting.
>
> Is anyone from LINK/SLUG across this one??
>
> http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20070723235113424

My understanding is that comments might not be 'heard' at this point
and that internationally the groups making these decisions have been
swamped with new members from MS. I am not involved in the process in
AU.

http://www.noooxml.org/arguments
http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/04/math-markup-marked-down.html
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-14606/rumors-of-microsoft-blackmail-in-new-zealand
http://www.noooxml.org/forum/t-14463/microsoft-recruiting-puppets-in-australia
http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=20051216153153504

I am a lay person so my lay understanding is that people with a
different business model or who are not favoured by Microsoft would be
at risk in working with ooxml
because it contains proprietary code. In an era where DRM and TPM have
been embedded in our laws it is possible to make a felon of someone
who develops interfacing with material which is not fully open.
This means that structurally the ooxml is not an open standard.
The political processes including the fast track, branch stacking, etc
make it even less unlikely to me that ooxml would be used in an open
standard kind of way.
In this instance to me the means used to promote ooxml speak clearly
about how safe the format would be for the wider community.

My understanding is that John Oxer has written a letter from linux.org.au
Letters from other parties cannot hurt.

Janet