The Foundation sees this as a contradiction to the EU’s own interoperability goals. Although XLSX is standardized as OOXML according to ISO/IEC 29500, Microsoft’s implementations often deviate from the specifications. Furthermore, features often change undocumented, which complicates compatibility with open-source software such as LibreOffice.
“OOXML” is literally just an XML serialization of MS Office internal data structures that Microsoft bribed the standards body to push through.
“bribed” is a gross simplifiction of the almost hilariously evil plot they pulled to get OOXML certified. They actually bribed a couple of smaller nation states to become IETF members and vote for Microsoft’s standard. It was a major scandal back in the day but formally legal.
It’s like noticing a car crash and looking back… you know you shouldn’t and yet it’s somehow mesmerizing. So… where can I actually read about this please?
I remember that plot also gumming up IETF business because the bribed nations just stopped participating after voting for Microsoft.
I remember, only trouble is a lot of people at the time didn’t care or were paid loads of money to not care.
Also the name Office Open XML right at the time OpenOffice was the only one about before oracle came in and fucked it over
FYI: it wasn’t a bribe. It was a temporary takeover of the standards body. They paid for memberships of a bunch of new people on the board for the critical vote.
So, a bribe with the proper bureaucratic steps?
I think saying that they “bribed the standards body” suggests the body was in on it. The actual allegation (I don’t know any facts, just these comments) seems to be that the body was subverted by other countries that were bribed by Microsoft. Being someone who doesn’t know the details there’s a worthwhile distinction there. Though that still opens questions about the board’s reaction, and I might read up on it all later.
Let me assure you that the original board that was voting for Open Office’s proposal was absolutely pissed off, short of dissolving but eventually unable to revert the decision because of it’s formal correctness.
…and bribed the represenatives of the “new” IETF members as well as their governments to vote for Microsoft’s standard. The latter was, of course, a matter strictly between “business partners” and probably barred behind NDAs, so “legal” as long as nobody would blow the wistle.