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

[jose lorenzo <hozelda@yahoo.com>]

--- 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.