Short translation of my reply

Opening
First I would like to note that the very short hearing peiode meens, that we at OpenOffice.org haven't had the opportunity to analyze the two reports.

Content
*Respond to "Økonomiske konsekvensvurderinger vedr. åbne standarder"
*Opening
*Content
*Conclusion
*Value to society
*About standards in general
*First report: Conversion of old documents
*Conditions out of scope
*Contact information


Conclusion
The first report "Økonomisk konsekvensvurdering af ODF som entydigt obligatorisk dokumentformat" has a lack of information and is so uncertain and unacurate that the report should be removed from the debate and shouldn't be part of the decision.

The second report "Økonomisk konsekvensvurdering af anvendelse af obligatoriske, åbne standarder for software i den offentlige sektor" is using conditions that is out of scope according to resolution B 103. EOOXML can't be implemented as a document standard unless the Parliament changes the resolution. Untill then, this report should be removed from the debate and shouldn't be part of the decision.