I promise that within a few minutes of reading this OOXML Wiki you will be wondering if this is in fact an ODF Wiki! This is incredible.
Fast forward to the section called, "Interoperability between ODF and OOXML", and enjoy. They cite the problem and make an interop recommendation for each entry. And what a recommendation it is. Speaks volumes.
There is definately something going on in Europe. The EU IDABC has rejected ODF, OOXML, OASIS, Ecma and ISO! And are now trying to write their own highly interoperable XML file format, ODEF. an effort we will fully support with our da Vinci plugin for MSOffice.
Well, not only will we support ODEF, we'll write it for them if they really want to cut to the chase and get the kind of vendor independent interoperability the world hungers for.
The British Standards Institute (BSi) is responsible for the massive research that went into this OOXML Wiki. They have hunted down and defined the interoperability problem areas between ODF and OOXML. Surprise surprise. They be many.
The interesting part is that the BSi researchers have found massive, indeed overwhelming fault with OOXML! Yet, instead of recommending that Ecma make the needed changes to OOXML, they instead recommend that ISO ODF make the changes!
Not OASIS ODF! Not Ecma OOXML.
ISO ODf!
The difference is all the difference in the world. Sun does not control ISO ODF the way they control OASIS ODF. And at ISO, all the binding of ODF to OpenOffice/StarOffice that accounts for the zero interoperability of ODF applications can be broken as needed.
This is indeed good stuff.
You can't read this research without thinking that the BSi is going to advise the British ISO NB contingent to vote against OOXML. But they aren't about to let ODF sit idle either. The only way they see to fix interoperability between OOXML and ODF is to identify the problems in OOXML, and FIX ODF to accomodate those problems!
Not OOXML. Yet all the fault they identify lies with OOXML.
Amazing.
Clearly the BSi recognizes that OOXML is a plugin bound to the MSOffice application series. Changing OOXML would require changes at the application level - changes in MSOffice.
Changing the application layer for 95% of all workgroup - workflow bound business processes would be a disaster. So they correctly see that the way forward is to change ODF, and tell Sun to do whatever it takes to adapt the OpenOffice/StarOffice applications that bind ODF. At less than 2% marketshare, this approach sound reasonable to me. But i'm not Sun. And i don't have a 2004 controlled interoperability-patent-market allocation-sweet sweet hardware deal with Microsoft either.
We've been working for more than a year on a set of ODF Interoperability Enhancements that would greatly benefit anyone working the converter - plugin - transformation interop sector. These proposals have been met with vicious vehemence at OASIS ODF - see the recent List Enhancement Proposal donnybrook as an example. So much so that we see no use in further proposals or our continued participation. And that after near five years of work on OASIS ODF.
We fully believe that our insistence on interoperability enhancements to ODF that would improve interop with Microsoft documents and applications is the reason why OASIS booted the OpenDocument Foundation. Pushing for interop with existing file formats and application is that bad. Opposing Sun is worth the wrath of big vendor toady OASIS.
But i have to wonder, how do these BSi guys know this? Obviously they have figured out that the only way to get true interoperability is to neutralize the big vendors influence and control of the standards process. Same as with the EU IDABC.
Must be something in the water. Drink up world. You actually can get everything you want. Including perfect interoperability.
It is desired to have improved interoperability between ODF and OOXML. However, OOXML lacks the following feature: image can be positioned absolutely within a frame
Proposed change: Include support for this feature from ISO ODF in order to improve interoperability between the two formats.
Include support for this feature in ISO ODF is another way of saying to hell with Ecma, OASIS and the big vendors driving the ODF-OOXML bus, Micrsoft and Sun.
This is delicious beyond belief. It's also the only way the world is going to get the interoperability they are demanding. The big vendors must be neutralized. The file formats must be completely independent of applications, platforms and the control of big vendors who routinely make exclussionary interoperabilty deals with each other whenever and wherever profitable.
Group Bookmarks tagged
Gary Edwards (343)
marbux (24)
Jesper Lund Stocholm (9)
mazyar hedayat (4)
Fast forward to the section called, "Interoperability between ODF and OOXML", and enjoy. They cite the problem and make an interop recommendation for each entry. And what a recommendation it is. Speaks volumes.
There is definately something going on in Europe. The EU IDABC has rejected ODF, OOXML, OASIS, Ecma and ISO! And are now trying to write their own highly interoperable XML file format, ODEF. an effort we will fully support with our da Vinci plugin for MSOffice.
Well, not only will we support ODEF, we'll write it for them if they really want to cut to the chase and get the kind of vendor independent interoperability the world hungers for.
The British Standards Institute (BSi) is responsible for the massive research that went into this OOXML Wiki. They have hunted down and defined the interoperability problem areas between ODF and OOXML. Surprise surprise. They be many.
The interesting part is that the BSi researchers have found massive, indeed overwhelming fault with OOXML! Yet, instead of recommending that Ecma make the needed changes to OOXML, they instead recommend that ISO ODF make the changes!
Not OASIS ODF! Not Ecma OOXML.
ISO ODf!
The difference is all the difference in the world. Sun does not control ISO ODF the way they control OASIS ODF. And at ISO, all the binding of ODF to OpenOffice/StarOffice that accounts for the zero interoperability of ODF applications can be broken as needed.
This is indeed good stuff.
You can't read this research without thinking that the BSi is going to advise the British ISO NB contingent to vote against OOXML. But they aren't about to let ODF sit idle either. The only way they see to fix interoperability between OOXML and ODF is to identify the problems in OOXML, and FIX ODF to accomodate those problems!
Not OOXML. Yet all the fault they identify lies with OOXML.
Amazing.
Clearly the BSi recognizes that OOXML is a plugin bound to the MSOffice application series. Changing OOXML would require changes at the application level - changes in MSOffice.
Changing the application layer for 95% of all workgroup - workflow bound business processes would be a disaster. So they correctly see that the way forward is to change ODF, and tell Sun to do whatever it takes to adapt the OpenOffice/StarOffice applications that bind ODF. At less than 2% marketshare, this approach sound reasonable to me. But i'm not Sun. And i don't have a 2004 controlled interoperability-patent-market allocation-sweet sweet hardware deal with Microsoft either.
We've been working for more than a year on a set of ODF Interoperability Enhancements that would greatly benefit anyone working the converter - plugin - transformation interop sector. These proposals have been met with vicious vehemence at OASIS ODF - see the recent List Enhancement Proposal donnybrook as an example. So much so that we see no use in further proposals or our continued participation. And that after near five years of work on OASIS ODF.
We fully believe that our insistence on interoperability enhancements to ODF that would improve interop with Microsoft documents and applications is the reason why OASIS booted the OpenDocument Foundation. Pushing for interop with existing file formats and application is that bad. Opposing Sun is worth the wrath of big vendor toady OASIS.
But i have to wonder, how do these BSi guys know this? Obviously they have figured out that the only way to get true interoperability is to neutralize the big vendors influence and control of the standards process. Same as with the EU IDABC.
Must be something in the water. Drink up world. You actually can get everything you want. Including perfect interoperability.
~ge~