Re: [oiic-formation-discuss] Reason and example arguing for the use of anODF (or XML) canonical form

[robert_weir@us.ibm.com]

Simon Calderson <caldersons@yahoo.co.uk> wrote
on 07/05/2008 01:09:51 PM:

> 
>  jose lorenzo <hozelda@yahoo.com> wrote:
> > I hadn't realized that an assumption deemed necessary in order
for this 
> > venture to have success would be that all market players (including
the
> > monopolist) cooperate fully.
> 
> Just to be clear, I wasn't advocating that assumption.
> 
> What I do say is actually two things:
> 
> 1. interop will only be improved by vendors participating in the new
> TC in good faith
> 2. the new TC cannot do much to improve interop in the products of
> vendors who do not have such good faith.
> 

Right.  We make the medicine, but we can't force
people to take it.

On the other hand, there are people out there, outside
of the TC, who can force people to take medicine, and if those people like
our medicine, then it could conceivably become mandatory in some places.
 But that is outside of our control.  All we can do is try to
create very good medicine.  We're forming a technical committee, with
the emphasis on technical.  Although our work has policy implications,
we are not the ones who set or enforce policy.

> For the most part, I believe anyone who participates in the new TC
> will do so out of good faith. Anyone not interested in ODF interop
> is just simply not going to participate. 
> 

I think that has to be our working assumption, until
proven otherwise.  It is not a guarantee, but I think we start from
that position. 

> And the corollary of that is that I believe it's just a waste of 
> time concentrating on features which "force" interoperability.
It's 
> not going to work, and the time would be better spent on creating
> tools and documents for those really interested in interop. This new
> TC cannot force people to interoperate: only market forces will do
that.
> 

Well said.