For your OOXML Conspiracy Theories - Miguel de Icaza

While he's right about a lot of things (especially that the ODF people could have spent more time on their spec rather than fighting against OOXML), it doesn't change the fact that even the most recent versions of MS's own products will generate files that:<p>1. Don't validate against the OOXML schema.<p>2. Contain large blobs of encoded binary data from previous versions of MS Office in the XML files.<p>For this reason alone (that the spec isn't followed correctly), I still prefer ODF.

I was one of the first people to reverse-engineer the binary Word file format and was one of the early contributors to POI.I've spent a career writing code against various file formats.<p>Unfortunately, most of the comments here are not based on first-hand technical knowledge. How many of you have tried to code against the OOXML spec? I have. It's pretty good.<p>Most people in the community of "people actually doing stuff in this area", which Miguel is a part of, feel like Microsoft is acting in good faith. See <a href="http://www.opensource.org/node/351" rel="nofollow">http://www.opensource.org/node/351</a>.

He can slam Groklaw as much as he wants, but I've still never seen them offer anything other than rational and backed interpretations of the presented facts.<p>I particularly love how he thinks ISO approval of OOXML is some sort of silver bullet against all allegations against him. <i>Everybody</i> in the know is very aware of the nastiness that went on with that. And as zdw in this discussion notes, it's ISO approval doesn't mean jack in reality.

Icaza has a long history of being a microsoft shill, I can't say I'm suprised to see him leap to his master's defence once again.