John Vandenberg wrote:
On Wed, Oct 1, 2008 at 9:15 AM, Jussi-Ville Heiskanen cimonavaro@gmail.com wrote:
Erik Moeller wrote:
I don't think there's any question that we are committed to making sure that every piece of user-facing content, including interactivity, can be accessed using 100% open source software. That's an important consensus. The primary issue is the question of parallel distribution, which is one on which reasonable people can disagree. We should collect as much data as possible to help the Board reach a decision on that question.
Simply because your first statement is in fact totally inaccurate, it is clearly a very useful clarification, coming as it does, from someone in your position.
:-)
Nevertheless, the statement is not in any shape or form relevant to the discussion about document formats. (For those joining the discussion late, software and document formats are quite separate things, only very tangentially and rarely significantly meeting - ...
Mixing the two compounds the confusion.
I think the brouhaha about Lempel-Ziv buried that question for a while)
I'll bite...
Lempel-Ziv brouhaha ?
I am aware that I am dating myself there.
As I recall it, (and my recollection is as ever fallible) there was a claim by some that a compression format was protected. And it was upheld. But the mathematical algorithm wasn't protected, so a totally equivalent format was created (and if I recall improved upon) later, and the original claimants for protection got their butts spanked, even though their claim held.
Yours,
Jussi-Ville Heiskanen