<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8" ?>
<rss version="2.0" xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/" xmlns:wikidot="http://www.wikidot.com/rss-namespace">

	<channel>
		<title>Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
		<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such</link>
		<description>Posts in the discussion thread &quot;Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such&quot; - Jon Bosak, the Sun Microsystems XML guru, is mentionning that Sun is supporting the ISO standardisation of OOXML. But maybe not at any price.</description>
				<copyright></copyright>
		<lastBuildDate>Tue, 14 Jul 2026 04:09:35 +0000</lastBuildDate>
		
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148#post-36717</guid>
				<title>Re: Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such#post-36717</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Tue, 24 Jul 2007 06:51:20 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Anonymous</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>It seems the INCITS no with comments included a comment (voted for by Sun) that the standard should also include all previous binary office document formats of Microsoft.<br /> That is extremly unlikely to be the case and would make the &quot;No with comments&quot; the same as an unfixable straightforward NO.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148#post-36537</guid>
				<title>Re: Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such#post-36537</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Mon, 23 Jul 2007 15:18:48 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>Anonymous</wikidot:authorName>								<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>In Spain IBM (backed by FFII) has asked for the same &quot;conditioned no with comments&quot;. We have no problem with this standard if everything that is wrong in it is fully fixed with enough warranties that this will happen. Microsoft just wants to get its &quot;yes&quot; promising that some day they will fix some things&#8230; that never will come if you don't force them with a &quot;NO&quot; or &quot;CONDITIONED NO&quot; vote. Sun is just naming in another way the &quot;Conditioned NO&quot; vote.</p> <p>So IBM is not any &quot;dogmatic anti-OOXML supporter&quot;. Indeed, never have been, the same as FFII, FSF, OFE et al.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148#post-36258</guid>
				<title>Re: Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such#post-36258</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Sat, 21 Jul 2007 14:59:55 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>zoobab</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>2946</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>Sun is not supporting OOXML as such, but well a modified version of OOXML which would fullfill the rules of interoperability. But with Microsoft, that won't happen soon.</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148#post-35863</guid>
				<title>Re: Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such#post-35863</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Thu, 19 Jul 2007 18:11:22 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>IvBeg</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>27710</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>Quite unusual that Sun really going to support OOXML. Isn' IBM now the only dogmatic anti-OOXML supporter or not?</p> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
					<item>
				<guid>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148#post-35321</guid>
				<title>Sun Microsystems supports OOXML, but not as such</title>
				<link>http://noooxml.wikidot.com/forum/t-14148/sun-microsystems-supports-ooxml-but-not-as-such#post-35321</link>
				<description></description>
				<pubDate>Wed, 18 Jul 2007 18:23:15 +0000</pubDate>
				<wikidot:authorName>zoobab</wikidot:authorName>				<wikidot:authorUserId>2946</wikidot:authorUserId>				<content:encoded>
					<![CDATA[
						 <p>Here is what he <a href="http://www.ibiblio.org/bosak/v1mail/200707/2007Jul16-081558.eml">wrote</a> about the INCITS vote:</p> <blockquote> <p>Date: Mon, 16 Jul 2007&#160;08:13:59 -0700 (PDT)<br /> From: <span class="wiki-email">moc.nus|kasob.noj#moc.nus|kasob.noj</span><br /> Subject: INCITS-V1: Conditional approval (disapproval with comments)<br /> To: <span class="wiki-email">gro.1v-sticni|1v-sticni#gro.1v-sticni|1v-sticni</span></p> <p>Correction to the minutes of 13 July 2007:</p> <p>Sun Microsystems specifically requested several times during the<br /> meeting that the option recorded in the draft minutes as<br /> &quot;Disapproval with comments&quot; be recorded as &quot;Conditional approval<br /> (disapproval with comments).&quot; We observed that the language of 9.8<br /> in the JTC1 Directives explicitly equates these two forms. That<br /> request was accepted with no objection.</p> <p>This change is important to Sun in ensuring that our position is<br /> correctly represented. <strong>We wish to make it completely clear that<br /> we support DIS 29500 becoming an ISO Standard and are in complete<br /> agreement with its stated purposes of enabling interoperability<br /> among different implementations and providing interoperable access<br /> to the legacy of Microsoft Office documents.</strong></p> <p><strong>Sun voted No on Approval because it is our expert finding, based<br /> on the analysis so far accomplished in V1, that DIS 29500 as<br /> presently written is technically incapable of achieving those<br /> goals, not because we disagree with the goals or are opposed to an<br /> ISO Standard that would enable them.</strong> Sun voted Yes on Conditional<br /> approval (disapproval with comments) because this is the only one<br /> of the options we were given that would guarantee that the<br /> specific changes already agreed upon by consensus in V1 would<br /> actually be implemented.</p> <p>We observed during the meeting that according to 9.8, the option<br /> sometimes described as &quot;No with comments&quot; actually contains an<br /> explicit promise of approval once &quot;the changes that would make the<br /> document acceptable&quot; have been implemented. We voted in the<br /> expectation that those changes will be made and that a version of<br /> DIS 29500 capable of achieving its objectives would be approved as<br /> an ISO Standard. We welcome the opportunity to work with others<br /> during the resolution phase to bring DIS 29500 to a level of<br /> specification that would enable its approval, and we request that<br /> our vote for conditional approval be correctly represented in the<br /> minutes.</p> <p>Jon</p> <div class="content-separator" style="display: none:"></div> <p>Jon Bosak, Distinguished Engineer, Corporate Standards<br /> Office of Global Government Strategy, Sun Microsystems<br /> Chair, Universal Business Language Technical Committee<br /> Member, INCITS V1 and ISO/IEC JTC1 SC34<br /> <span class="wiki-email">moc.nus|kasob.noj#moc.nus|kasob.noj</span> <a href="http://www.sun.com/standards">http://www.sun.com/standards</a></p> <div class="content-separator" style="display: none:"></div> </blockquote> 
				 	]]>
				</content:encoded>							</item>
				</channel>
</rss>