 |
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/05/09/1-2-1.aspx
Heh. I hadn't even noticed it was from MSDN until I pasted the link. This is
why source code makes for a bad standard. :-) It's interesting to read some
of the comments and see the arguments for interpreting MS as evil there. I'd
rather have a standard for prose documents that says "flag indicates
obsolete word-break required" than a standard for spreadsheets that doesn't
say what a formula looks like. That seems just kind of weird. The thing
lots of people forget is that MS has money, and open source groups generally
don't, so CYA happens a lot less with open source.
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Darren New wrote:
> http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/05/09/1-2-1.aspx
>
> Heh. I hadn't even noticed it was from MSDN until I pasted the link.
> This is why source code makes for a bad standard. :-) It's interesting
> to read some of the comments and see the arguments for interpreting MS
> as evil there. I'd rather have a standard for prose documents that says
> "flag indicates obsolete word-break required" than a standard for
> spreadsheets that doesn't say what a formula looks like. That seems just
> kind of weird. The thing lots of people forget is that MS has money,
> and open source groups generally don't, so CYA happens a lot less with
> open source.
>
Ignoring the technical arguments about whether M$ is doing the right
thing or not (for the record, I believe they're not), I particularly
like Jomar Silva's comment (fourth one received). In fact I like it so
much that I'm going to quote it for those who can't be bothered to read
for themselves:
"If you can't (or don't want) to do that, please stop talking about the
ODF TC this way, and don't involve TC members with Microsoft business
decisions (on this episode, yours 'throw mud on everyone' strategy is
going far from the acceptable limits).
This also raise additional suspicious about your real intention on the
ODF TC (at least to me)."
As an aside, does anyone know if Doug Mahugh is blogging as part of his
duties as an employee of M$ or is he writing from a heartfelt belief
that his employers are right?
John
--
"Eppur si muove" - Galileo Galilei
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John <joh### [at] home com> wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
> > http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/05/09/1-2-1.aspx
> Ignoring the technical arguments about whether M$ is doing the right
> thing or not (for the record, I believe they're not), I particularly
> like Jomar Silva's comment (fourth one received). In fact I like it so
> much that I'm going to quote it for those who can't be bothered to read
> for themselves:
>
> "If you can't (or don't want) to do that, please stop talking about the
> ODF TC this way, and don't involve TC members with Microsoft business
> decisions (on this episode, yours 'throw mud on everyone' strategy is
> going far from the acceptable limits).
>
> This also raise additional suspicious about your real intention on the
> ODF TC (at least to me)."
>
> As an aside, does anyone know if Doug Mahugh is blogging as part of his
> duties as an employee of M$ or is he writing from a heartfelt belief
> that his employers are right?
He's still right about "This is the state of formula interoperability among ODF
spreadsheets today", despite adding text to numbers being dumb. And as far as
I can gather, Microsoft is just choosing a side for an underspec, just like
Lotus Symphony or OO.
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
Doctor John wrote:
> Darren New wrote:
>> http://blogs.msdn.com/dmahugh/archive/2009/05/09/1-2-1.aspx
> As an aside, does anyone know if Doug Mahugh is blogging as part of his
> duties as an employee of M$ or is he writing from a heartfelt belief
> that his employers are right?
msdn.com is a Microsoft corporate site. I'd have to say they at least
approve of his position. If he were blogging for himself alone, I'd think MS
would make him blog on a different site or something.
Now, are they paying him to write articles, or is he doing it as a sideline
to his job? That I dunno. But I don't imagine too much stuff stays up on
blogs.msdn.com that MS doesn't approve of.
Unless giant corporations have gotten much more relaxed about such things
since last time I worked in a giant corporation. :-)
--
Darren New, San Diego CA, USA (PST)
There's no CD like OCD, there's no CD I knoooow!
Post a reply to this message
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
