ScanIAm wrote:
borosen wrote:
This is exactly why they should have been left out of the standard proposal.
If it is not supposed to be there, don't put it there.
If anobody wants to extend beyond the standard, please do so, but keep the crap out of the standard.
I know it may come as a suprise to you, but there are an awful lot of documents that currently exist in some version of office format. The naive idea that we'd all join hands and sing kubaya while we mass convert these files to the newer format is rediculous.
By your standards, we would simply not have access to these files at all which would mean that the standard would never be used.
Then we'd have more people whining about how "MSFT doesn't follow standards" every time Word opened up a file created on a previous version.
Here's a brief, but bitter truth:
Whatever format MSFT uses IS the standard.
Hop on the train, or don't, but the opinion of some artificially created standards board doesn't really matter.
I agree with you here.
The reason this document was submitted to iso have nothing to do with quality or openness.
It is a document describing some part of the new office document format.
The document is so bug-ridden though, I am happy I was not part in producing it.
Actually, I would be ashamed if I was, and it was forwarded to iso as a standard proposal.
