On 5/6/06, John McCreesh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 16:36 +0100, Ian Lynch wrote:
> On Sat, 2006-05-06 at 09:39 -0400, Louis Suarez-Potts wrote:
[snip]
> > fine: we know where
> > you stand.
>
> You clearly don't but don't let that get in the way of objectivity ;-)
>
Ian and Louis - I'm not picking on either of you - this just happens to
be the latest email I've seen in this chain.
Cristian has already requested we draw a line under the MS-O / ODF
discussion as it's getting increasingly off-topic. As another co-Lead
I'd like to add my weight to that request.
I don't want to disrespect your guys decision, but this is a very
important marketing decision. With a supposedly odf filter created
for MSO their will be reporters asking, "How does this affect OOo."
As it stands now our message seems to say it is unfortunate for us. I
believe as some others have said also that this is a good thing for
OOo. I would like our marketing leads and co-leads to be able to
respond this is a good thing for OOo. It will lower the barrier to
transition. Seriously consider this stance if there is an ODF filter
we as a marketing group for OOo have an opportunity to capitalize on
it.
As far as MOOX becoming an open standard it wouldn't be happy with it,
but as far as OOo is concerned it would benefit us. It would lower
that barrier and OOo would be able to implement the entire standard
without having to guess and check to create interoperability.
As long as we are fighting MS on the format level we are going to have
a difficult time winning over customers. Again as the title of the
thread suggests this is what I feel is a good public strategy.
--
Adam Moore
Founding Member
http://www.opendocumentfellowship.org
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
