[ZeroGravitas]

Last time I checked not even Microsoft Office implemented the version of OOXML they forced through ISO which somewhat undermines your point.

http://adjb.net/post/Microsoft-Fails-the-Standards-Test.aspx

Note that post isn't written by some random GNU fanatic, but one of the key figures involved in the standardization.

"The simple validators developed by me (Office-o-tron) and by Jesper Lund Stocholm (ISO/IEC 29500 Validator) reveal, to Microsoft's dismay, that the output documents of the Office 2010 Beta are non-conformant, and that this is in large part due to glaring uncorrected problems in the text (e.g. contradictory provisions). It is also a worrying commentary on the standards-savvyness of the Office developers that the first amateur attempts of part-time outsiders find problems with documents which Redmond’s internal QA processes have missed. I confidently predict that fuller validation of Office document is likely to reveal many problems both with those documents, and with the Standard itself, over the coming years."

[triton]

This was 3 years, a beta, an entire office version and numerous service packs ago...

Not only that it complied to transitional schema at the time.

Office 2013 supports full strict compliance. Office 2010 can read strict and write transitional.

Transitional will be deprecated when Office 2010 is EOL (2020).

Get your facts right.

[ZeroGravitas]

The whole point of the article is that "complying with transitional" is bullshit. It's just the second time that Microsoft got a standards org to rubber stamp whatever crap they were already outputting. And both times they failed to even document that properly.

ECMA does that for a living but they only got away with it at ISO because Microsoft promised it was only for legacy documents and they would fully comply with strict. It looks like they're at least claiming strict conformance for output in 2013 (as the blog notes basic tesing showed they couldn't even document their own output correctly in 2010).

And you're proudly claiming that they'll phase out the production of documents they described as only for "legacy" in 2008 a mere 12 years later.

They destroyed the credibility of the ISO to maintain their format monopoly.