<?xml version="1.0" encoding="utf-8"?>
<rss version="2.0">
  <channel>
    <title>OpenDocument's feed | Diigo Group</title>
    <link>http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/approval</link>
    <description>Bookmarks from OpenDocument tagged by approval</description>
    <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:57:33 -0000</pubDate>
    <item>
      <title>Microsoft's Great Besmirching | Linux Journal</title>
      <link>http://www.linuxjournal.com/content/microsofts-great-besmirching</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;Glyn Moody provides a summary of the destruction of ISO&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Highlights and Sticky Notes:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;content&quot;&gt;Of course, all companies try to bend the rules in the their favour, and it would be unfair to pick on Microsoft for doing the same.  But what has happened over the last year and a half goes so far beyond the accepted rough and tumble of the standards game that cumulatively it can only be considered as an all-out attack on the machinery of standards-making.  Consider the &lt;a href=&quot;http://www.noooxml.org/irregularities&quot;&gt;evidence&lt;/a&gt;.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tags:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/approval&quot;&gt;approval&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/corruption&quot;&gt;corruption&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/iso&quot;&gt;iso&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/ooxml&quot;&gt;ooxml&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/open-standards&quot;&gt;open-standards&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Posted by:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/garyedwards&quot;&gt;garyedwards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:57:33 -0000</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Microsoft OOXML standardization bid: The clock is ticking | All about Microsoft | ZDNet.com</title>
      <link>http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=1300</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Highlights and Sticky Notes:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;content&quot;&gt;The &lt;a href=&quot;http://blogs.zdnet.com/microsoft/?p=290&quot;&gt;battle over OOXML standarization is all about money and marketshare&lt;/a&gt;. Microsoft wants OOXML to qualify as an “open standard” so that the company can continue to sell Office into governments that see ISO as the gold standard bearer. Many of the companies&amp;nbsp; that have fought publicly against OOXML gaining ISO standardization approval are hoping that failure of OOXML to get the ISO nod will give them a chance to gain more marketshare in a world where Office still runs on more than 90 percent of Windows desktops.&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tags:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/approval&quot;&gt;approval&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/iso&quot;&gt;iso&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/mary-jo&quot;&gt;mary-jo&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/odf&quot;&gt;odf&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/ooxml&quot;&gt;ooxml&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Posted by:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/garyedwards&quot;&gt;garyedwards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:59:14 -0000</pubDate>
    </item>
    <item>
      <title>Some thoughts on OOXML | Larsblog</title>
      <link>http://www.garshol.priv.no/blog/154.html</link>
      <description>&lt;p&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Highlights and Sticky Notes:&lt;/strong&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;div class=&quot;content&quot;&gt;&lt;h2&gt;What is to be done?&lt;/h2&gt;

&lt;p&gt;ISO has in a sense put itself in an awkward position here by
already approving the rival &lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenDocument&quot;&gt;OpenDocument&lt;/a&gt;
format as an ISO standard. This makes it harder to reject OOXML, and
at the same time makes it difficult to approve OOXML, since it
competes with an existing ISO standard. Generally, I'm unhappy with
how closely these two standards are tied to existing software. What I
would really have liked to see was for OpenDocument and OOXML both to
be dropped, and the two communities to sit down and work out a common
agreed format that is not tied to any existing software. The Chinese
&lt;a href=&quot;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Uniform_Office_Format&quot;&gt;UOF&lt;/a&gt;
format, for example, might have served as the starting point for
this. &lt;a href=&quot;http://adjb.net/index.php?entry=entry071207-071632&quot;&gt;ODA&lt;/a&gt; has
also been suggested. Unfortunately, this requires a political will
that does not seem to be present, and so this seems unlikely for now.

&lt;/p&gt;&lt;/div&gt;&lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Tags:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/approval&quot;&gt;approval&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/iso&quot;&gt;iso&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/microsoft&quot;&gt;microsoft&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/msoffice&quot;&gt;msoffice&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/odf&quot;&gt;odf&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/ooxml&quot;&gt;ooxml&lt;/a&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/tag/sgml&quot;&gt;sgml&lt;/a&gt; &lt;/p&gt;&lt;p&gt;&lt;strong&gt;Posted by:&lt;/strong&gt; &lt;a href=&quot;http://groups.diigo.com/opendocument/bookmark/garyedwards&quot;&gt;garyedwards&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;</description>
      <pubDate>Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:42:06 -0000</pubDate>
    </item>
  </channel>
</rss>