[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]
Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Reason and example arguing for the use of an ODF (or XML) canonical form
--- On Sat, 7/12/08, Radoslav Dejanović <radoslav.dejanovic@opsus.hr> wrote: > From: Radoslav Dejanović <radoslav.dejanovic@opsus.hr> > Subject: Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Reason and example arguing for the use of an ODF (or XML) canonical form > To: > Cc: oiic-formation-discuss@lists.oasis-open.org > Date: Saturday, July 12, 2008, 4:32 PM > Dave Pawson wrote: > > 2008/7/11 Peter Dolding <oiaohm@gmail.com>: > >> Getting the non Wild West Method keys is not a > long process. > > > > It's not proved workable Peter IMHO. People > don't like central registries? > > Generally speaking, they don't. But, we're talking > about a standard, > something that does imply to some point that there is ... > > For extensions I favour the requirement that when a > user invokes a feature > > which creates an extension, he/she is warned about it? > > "Hey, this will extend the standard" or > something. > > That way you know what you're doing? No excuses. > Sometimes the feature > > will be needed, but it's a user choice. No more > vendor lock-in by the back door. > > I wouldn't bet on customers. They don't care, they > just want to get > their work done. If it is done by using non-standard > extension - well, > to hell with standards! A warning is not a deterrent - > users will simply > ignore them, and software vendor can simply omit such > warnings, > especially if the incompatible feature is made by that > vendor - and > there's nothing you can do about that. This really > isn't a solution for > vendor lock in, because if you have a vendor of "Some > Office" that made > nice but incompatible extension to "Some Office", > and at the same time > it just happened to be that majority of people use > "Some Office", you > have an instant lock-in. > People would simply ignore warnings because it makes their > work more > productive, and since they're the majority, who cares > about users of > less known applications? > And again, "Some Office" will not display a > warning box because there's > no force of this world that would force them to warn their > users that > there's a compatibility problem with that extension > they've made. Large and important classes of users do care, but many do not. Many of those that do not likely do not understand/appreciate the value of using an openly interoperable standard. I think there is an ODF related TC whose aim might be in part to help sell the benefits of such a standard.
[Date Prev] | [Thread Prev] | [Thread Next] | [Date Next] -- [Date Index] | [Thread Index] | [List Home]