From owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org Sun Jun 24 12:06:04 2007 MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-type: multipart/alternative; boundary="Boundary_(ID_McuX1o42HopV2721VTMYHw)" Date: Sun, 24 Jun 2007 15:05:51 -0400 From: robert_weir@us.ibm.com Subject: Re: INCITS-V1: NamingDIS29500-Durasau-12 In-reply-to: <200706221511.l5MFBj3u170123@jurassic-x4600.sfbay.sun.com> Sender: owner-incits-v1@incits-v1.org To: incits-v1@incits-v1.org Reply-to: incits-v1@incits-v1.org X-MIMETrack: Serialize by Router on WTFMAIL03/WTF/M/Lotus(Release 6.5.6FP1|April 24, 2007) at 06/24/2007 03:05:53 PM, Serialize complete at 06/24/2007 03:05:53 PM X-PMX-Version: 5.2.0.264296 This is a multipart message in MIME format. --Boundary_(ID_McuX1o42HopV2721VTMYHw) Content-type: text/plain; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT > > What *does* move me to agree that the name "Office Open XML" > should be changed is that it is designed to cause confusion with > OpenOffice, a leading open-source ODF application. It is not the > purpose of the standards we work on to cause confusion, and > certainly not to deliberately cause confusion. The name should be > changed to something that avoids this confusion rather than > actively promoting it. > > Jon > I'd second that. I've done some research in this area to see how often the name of the standard is misstated as "Open Office XML". This is happening everywhere, and by doing so is causing user confusion as well as diluting the value of the Open Office trademark. For examples, query Google for "Ecma Open Office XML" or "Microsoft Open Office XML". You should get zero hits for these phrases, but instead you get hundreds of hits, from the press, from analysts, even from Microsoft. I've updated my analysis of this problem here: http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/01/amusing-but-still-confusing.html I'd like to see us submit a comment requesting a name change. Maybe "Legacy Office XML" or LOX. -Rob ___________________________ Rob Weir Software Architect Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software IBM Software Group email: robert_weir@us.ibm.com phone: 1-978-399-7122 blog: http://www.robweir.com/blog/ --Boundary_(ID_McuX1o42HopV2721VTMYHw) Content-type: text/html; charset=US-ASCII Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT

>
> What *does* move me to agree that the name "Office Open XML"
> should be changed is that it is designed to cause confusion with
> OpenOffice, a leading open-source ODF application.  It is not the
> purpose of the standards we work on to cause confusion, and
> certainly not to deliberately cause confusion.  The name should be
> changed to something that avoids this confusion rather than
> actively promoting it.
>
> Jon
>

I'd second that.  I've done some research in this area to see how often the name of the standard is misstated as "Open Office XML".  This is happening everywhere, and by doing so is causing user confusion as well as diluting the value of the Open Office trademark.  For examples, query Google for "Ecma Open Office XML" or "Microsoft Open Office XML".  You should get zero hits for these phrases, but instead you get hundreds of hits, from the press, from analysts, even from Microsoft.

I've updated my analysis of this problem here:  http://www.robweir.com/blog/2007/01/amusing-but-still-confusing.html

I'd like to see us submit a comment requesting a name change.  Maybe "Legacy Office XML" or LOX.

-Rob

___________________________

Rob Weir
Software Architect
Workplace, Portal and Collaboration Software
IBM Software Group

email: robert_weir@us.ibm.com
phone: 1-978-399-7122
blog: http://www.robweir.com/blog/


--Boundary_(ID_McuX1o42HopV2721VTMYHw)--