typodupeerror

• #### Funny? (Score:5, Interesting)

on Tuesday August 26, 2008 @03:45AM (#24748441)

Isn't it funny that the entire LHC spec is 1.600 pages, while the OOXML documentation, as submitted by Microsoft, is a full 6.000 pages.
Does this reflect a difference in complexity, or is it a sign of something else?

• #### Class - thank you (Score:2)

Now *THAT* is the observation of the month.

Don't get carried away though, there are only a few day of August left :-)

• #### Re: (Score:2)

I was going to mod this up but can't decide if its funny, informative or what...

Regardless it doesn't reflect well on the OOXML spec - wonder how many of those pages could be culled by a good editing session and removing all the redundant repeated information?

• #### Re: (Score:2)

Try reading the ISO SQL spec. It might be shorter than OOXML (to be honest, I don't remember), but I am quite sure that it's longer than the 1600 pages mentioned here, when the relevant appendices are included.
• #### Re: (Score:2)

MS is known for bloat and the LHC ain't as complex as people think.
• #### Less than Office Open XML (Score:2)

The specification for Office Open XML has 6000 pages. And is missing some important stuff.

#### Related LinksTop of the: day, week, month.

If I'd known computer science was going to be like this, I'd never have given up being a rock 'n' roll star. -- G. Hirst

Working...