Both ODF and OOXML are only one WTO Dispute Resolution Process complaint
away from losing their international standard, national technical
regulation, and government procurement specification status. They do not
meet the minimum requirements of international law. Both are unnecessary
obstacles to international trade; neither specify a uniform and
substitutable product. That does not sound like a sound business plan to me.

So I return to my question posed in an earlier post: Will ODF v. 1.2 under
your leadership attempt to "clearly and unambiguously specify that
conformance requirements essential to achieve the interoperability" and will
the standards-based interoperability between *different* IT systems be
"demonstrable," as required by JTC 1 Directives?

That is not a complicated question and it requires no deep dive into
international law to answer. International law requires what the quoted JTC
1 Directives require in this regard, but for purposes of the point under
discussion we need go no further than the Directives' plain language.


One either adheres to the rules or one forfeits the moral high ground to
complain when others ignore the rules. Where does Rob Weir stand on
complying with the rules?