Comments on: VML and OOXML: Cum mortuis in lingua mortua

By: The Funnel and the Wedge

The Funnel and the Wedge — Wed, 06 Jan 2010 02:05:06 +0000

[...] attempting to gain de jure recognition of them. But the mechanism is the same in either case: VML, JScript, MS Kerberos, J++, C++/CLI, XPS, and of course OOXML. Standardization just means that [...]

By: Albert

Albert — Fri, 18 Aug 2006 21:00:00 +0000

Microsoft will most likely never support SVG but go straight to XAML.
A next version of the OOXML format will then probably replace the VML format with XAML.
The .NET 3.0 framework will most likely contain a lot of support for XAML and probalby the next version of IE (IE8?) will then also support XAML and pretty soon all of SVG will be ancient history before it got of the ground

By: Anonymous

Anonymous — Fri, 28 Jul 2006 23:08:00 +0000

ECMA has lost any credibility they may have had with the standards community. They are now the Swiss bank account of standards organizations.

By: Ian Lynch

Ian Lynch — Thu, 27 Jul 2006 09:48:00 +0000

Problem is getting this sort of knowledge widespread. Any such issues need to be highlighted with the standards committees since ratifying a “standard” that clearly disregards agreed open standards simply discredits the whole process.

By: Ben Langhinrichs

Ben Langhinrichs — Tue, 25 Jul 2006 18:10:00 +0000

Good catch! In my opinion, this is the sort of analysis which is going to be most effective in coalescing support around ODF instead of Open XML, as it does not simply say “Open XML is bad because it is proposed by Microsoft”, but rather “Open XML is bad because of specific features which are only included to help Microsoft but which would be difficult/painful for other vendors to support”. Like your earlier analysis of the hard coded borders, this is the sort of valid criticism of a proposed standard which should be done, no matter where the proposed standard originated. Thank you.