Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
> news:n9apb5-l3s.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>
>> Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>>> Mark Kent <mark.kent@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in
>>> news:3ohnb5-av1.ln1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx:
>>>
>>>> Jesper Lund Stocholm <jls2008@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> espoused:
>
>>>>> Please note that the above is your personal opinion. I simply don't
>>>>> agree with you on this.
>>>>
>>>> Which part of the question are you claiming to disagree with?
>>>
>>> I dissagree that I am "assisting in pushing an immarure and
>>> unimplementable document through a fast-track process which was never
>>> intended for such use".
>>
>> So you deny that you're doing it, now?
>
> Of course I am denying your allegations.
>
It's not my allegation. It's a matter of fact that OOXML has hundreds,
if not thousands, of outstanding issues, and it is also a matter of fact
that OOXML is being pushed through, at the behest of ECMA, on an
accelerated approvals track which is clearly not supported by very large
numbers of people (plenty of evidence to this effect posted here and
elsewhere). It is also a matter of fact that Microsoft will /not/
support the ISO standard going forward, as they have said this
themselves. It's also a matter of fact that you are supporting OOXML,
and that you are doing so in your professional capacity whilst working
for a Microsoft partner.
So, which bit were you denying?
--
| mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
| Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
| Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
| Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |
|
|
