OpenDocument's feed | Diigo Group

IBM's Director of Strategy comes clean on OpenXML - IBM WILL support OpenXML in its Lotus and Portal products - Notes2Self.net

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:01:29 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Well, if that's IBM's plan they're going to need more than ODF, that's for sure - and that brings us to the announcement I've been wondering about:

IBM favors ODF as a file format because it is "truly open" and technically elegant, Heintzman said.
But IBM will support Open XML, which is the current document format in Office 2007, in its Lotus collaboration and portal products. IBM already supports older versions of Office.

I feel a Pamela Jones moment coming on .... there it is, as plain as day for the world to see, Doug Heintzman breaks through all IBM's doublespeak and hypocrisy and admits it.

I don't know about "Beyond Office" as a plan, I think the real game here is "Beyond ODF"

Tags: cdf heintzman ibm odf ooxml openxml

Posted by: garyedwards

IBM’s Stance Against OpenXML Is Increasingly Confusing : Oliver Bell’s weblog

Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:01:29 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Events have played out in the media and in the blogosphere over the last couple of weeks that represent a breakdown of some of those anti-OpenXML arguments that have been played back so frequently over the last year.

Arguments that there is a lack of demand for Open XML, the specification is too complex to implement, the specification can’t be deployed cross platform and the long running but baseless claim that the Ecma-376 specification might be encumbered by IPR and patent threats all appear to have been cast aside as big blue steps up to meet the demands of their own customers and the market in general.

Here is a blow by blow review of the relevant activity over the last two weeks…

Tags: cdf heintzman ibm odf ooxml opendocument openxml symphony weir

Posted by: garyedwards

Did the W3C acknowledge CDF’s potential as an office format (vs ODF) in newly public e-mail? | Berlind’s Testbed | ZDNet.com

Tue, 11 Dec 2007 23:17:06 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Along the way, both sides know that there is little margin for error. All it takes is for one slip-up in messaging, one missed appointment, one mistake or one technical snafu to create a hole that the other side will gladly drive a Mack truck through. The stakes are so high that both sides have done a remarkable if not awe-inspiring (though not always commendable) job in executing their global full court presses. For the ODF community, it’s relatively minor to have a few dissenters like Edwards and Hiser break ranks. But, should the W3C concur with Edwards and Hiser that CDF is the more sensible candidate (than ODF) to be the world’s international open standard for universal document interop and portability, solidarity around ODF could weaken. And any weakening of solidarity around ODF is exactly the sort of hole that Microsoft would look to drive a truck through.

If an indicator from the W3C that CDF is better-suited for ODF’s job than ODF could lead to such a hole, a similar indicator from IBM would be disastrous for the ODF community. Although it’s nothing more than a wild guess on my behalf, I’m willing to bet that IBM is probably responsible for more than 40 percent of the global resources being brought to bear on ODF’s behalf, if not 50 or 60 (percent). Microsoft wouldn’t need a Mack truck to take advantage of an IBM insinuation that ODF is non-strategic (or, “transitional” as Edwards said to me in an e-mail). Global support for ODF would very likely unravel because of how many people from governments to businesses to the ISO would feel betrayed and Microsoft’s OOXML would be left as the only format standing. The ODF coalition might live to see another day and another battle with CDF as their savior, but the damage would very likely be irreversible given the long memories of most of those who were betrayed.

Whereas the W3C has very little riding on ODF (Format), IBM has everything riding on it. Alright, not everything. IBM is involved in plenty of other businesses. But, after investing so much in ODF and now being so close to its best shot at seeking the aforementioned revenge, the last thing Big Blue can afford is a material breakdown in the world’s interest in ODF.

The question now is whether that moment has arrived for Gary Edwards and Sam Hiser in whole or in part, or maybe not at all. In response to my post, Doug Schepers, the primary contact at the W3C for CDF commented that in his eyes, it was simply an “honest misunderstanding on their part, and perhaps overenthusiasm.” Edwards, who over the weekend, disclosed to me the exact content of his e-mails with Schepers clearly had enough and simply published those e-mails here on ZDNet under the heading An Honest Misunderstanding? Hardly! Play the tape!. You can read the e-mails yourself. But, if there’s any text in them that vindicates Edwards and Hiser, it’s the part where Schepers wrote the following to them (I’ve boldfaced the most salient point):

So, what do you think? Do Edwards and Hiser have more credibility now that this e-mail has come to light?

Tags: berlind cdf foundation heintzman odf ooxml opendocument schepers w3c zdnet

Posted by: garyedwards

OpenDocument's feed | Diigo Group

IBM's Director of Strategy comes clean on OpenXML - IBM *WILL* support OpenXML in its Lotus and Portal products - Notes2Self.net

IBM’s Stance Against OpenXML Is Increasingly Confusing : Oliver Bell’s weblog

Did the W3C acknowledge CDF’s potential as an office format (vs ODF) in newly public e-mail? | Berlind’s Testbed | ZDNet.com

IBM's Director of Strategy comes clean on OpenXML - IBM WILL support OpenXML in its Lotus and Portal products - Notes2Self.net