Re: Regarding OOXML and Microsoft patents

[Miguel de Icaza <miguel ximian com>]

Hello,

> > > Also, why do you say the format is open? Can you tell me how Word95 does
> > > auto-space ?
> > 
> > 	Can you tell me how ODF lays out paragraphs or does line-breaking or
> > wraps text to shaped embedded objects or ... ?
> 
> Nothing in OOXML spec explains how Word95 does autospace, so how can a
> full implementation of OOXML respect that tag's meaning?

The topic is addressed here:

http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/archive/2007/01/09/specifying-the-document-settings.aspx

And it addresses in particular the issue of whether it should be removed
or not.

> This is not a discussion about layouts. If it's bad that such a standard
> defines layouts, I may agree. Still, that means that tag must disappear.

People with different backgrounds will come to different conclusions
about removing the tags.   This was done for another ECMA spec, and I
wish that the information was kept (to this day, I still keep the
original drafts and the early published documents because things that
were deemed "implementation specific" happen in the wild, and when it
comes to interop, you want to be forgiving about what you accept and
strict on what you generate).

Of course this is my position on technical merits, others implementors
might have other views.   On political and activist grounds you might
also reach different conclusions, but I will find it difficult in the
future to say with a straight face in court "well, they did not specify
enough, so this format created lock-in". 

> Specially from people who work for a company that is strategically
> aligned with Microsoft.

Ah, the old guilt by association way of constructing a logical argument.
Always a fine choice.

Miguel