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)--