OpenDocument's feed | Diigo Group

Griffin Brown Weblog - ODF validation for the cognoscenti

Tue, 06 May 2008 19:05:47 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Just when it seemed like nobody was interested in the ODF conformance smoke test posted a few days ago, IBM's Rob Weir weighs in with a lengthy piece in response.

Tags: brown iso jtc-sc34 odf ooxml weir

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML: The next step - Interop at the International Standards legal level | Marbux - Weir - Ian [odf-discuss]

Mon, 14 Apr 2008 17:17:00 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Both ODF and OOXML are only one WTO Dispute Resolution Process complaint away from losing their international standard, national technical regulation, and government procurement specification status. They do not meet the minimum requirements of international law. Both are unnecessary obstacles to international trade; neither specify a uniform and substitutable product. That does not sound like a sound business plan to me. So I return to my question posed in an earlier post: Will ODF v. 1.2 under your leadership attempt to "clearly and unambiguously specify that conformance requirements essential to achieve the interoperability" and will the standards-based interoperability between *different* IT systems be "demonstrable," as required by JTC 1 Directives? That is not a complicated question and it requires no deep dive into international law to answer. International law requires what the quoted JTC 1 Directives require in this regard, but for purposes of the point under discussion we need go no further than the Directives' plain language. One either adheres to the rules or one forfeits the moral high ground to complain when others ignore the rules. Where does Rob Weir stand on complying with the rules?

Tags: interop iso odf ooxml wto

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML and ODF: The next step | [odf-discuss] Marbux Responds!

Wed, 09 Apr 2008 17:22:53 -0000

Comments:

Outstanding analysis and research by the legendary marbux posted by garyedwards

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

The issue we were discussing -- and what I believe the ODEF conference was very much concerned with -- was whether ODF plus vendor-specific extensions will be classified as conformant ODF. The market requirement is for "Exchange Formats" and document-level interoperability. I could repose my question as whether ODF v. 1.2 will "clearly and unambiguously specify interoperability requirements essential to achieve the interoperability," as required by JTC 1 Directives. As you noted in an earlier post in this thread, you can't do interoperability if you use vendor extensions. > I see a standard as providing a shared vocabulary for buyers and sellers > to express their requirements. You are in error. This is a matter controlled by law rather than by personal opinion. Standards are all about the substitutability of goods, weights, and measures. A standard specifies all characteristics of a product, weight, or measure in mandatory terms so there is uniformity. Standards are the antithesis of product differentiation. Their very purpose is to eliminate product differentiation.

Tags: interop interoperability iso marbux odf ooxml opendocument-fellowship

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML OPS and the GPL: A disappointing surprise from the SFLC | Gray Matter

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:56:35 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

I view the spec as confusing, obtuse, error-ridden, x86-centric, incomplete, and redundant. Microsoft sat on the board of ODF for _years_ without offering any help on the minor items ODF didn't provide that they wanted. Now that governments start pressing for permanent standards on document storage, MS throws out this half-baked item and expects a reward for good behavior. Maybe somebody on the board of directors at our company likes it, but the technical folks having to add more work are less than happy about this beast.

If they had to go with XML, couldn't they at least have allowed standard XML with attributes and the like instead of x86 specific, binary incompatible, past-version deprecating, standard-avoiding, crash on normal XML.. ... mess... that they have offered for consumption? Oh.. but wait, I'm sure the BRM fixed that in the week given. I'm sure the pretty version will show up any day now.

Tags: gpl grey-matter iso microsoft ooxml ops

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML and ISO: The Process Challenge - A Predictable Path | Matusow's Blog

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:27:27 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Where can we expect challenges?

Tags: iso jtc-1 ooxml open-standards

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML: MSOffice Open XML - Where The Rubber Meets The Road | Matusow's Blog

Tue, 08 Apr 2008 19:06:22 -0000

Comments:

ISO NB's approved MS-OOXML not because it meets ISO Interoperability Requirements. It doesn't. OOXML doesn't even come close. They approved OOXML because it's the best deal they can get given the MSOffice predicament their governments are caught in.

Governments got the binary blueprints they have been insisting on, but didn't get the mapping of those binaries to OOXML.

Governemnts also took control of OOXML, with Patrick Durusau and the JTC-1 now in copmplete control of the specifications future. Sadly though, Durusau and company will not be able to make the interop changes they know are required by ISO and related World Trade Agreements. The OOXML charter prevents any changes that would degrade in any way compatibility with MSOffice! This charter lock was on full display in the Microsoft - Ecma response to Geneva BRM comment resolutions, with Microsoft refusing to address any comments that would alter compliance with MSOffice.

Durusau has always believed that a one to one mapping between OOXML and ODF is possible. Just prior to the Geneva BRM though, the EU DIN Workgroup released their preliminary report on harmonization, which they found to be a next to impossible task given the applicaiton specific nature of both ODF and OOXML.

The DIN Report no doubt left the mapping-harmonization crowd (lead by Durusau) with few choices other than to take control of OOXML and figure out the binary to OOXML mappings for themselves, wih the hope that somewhere down the road OpenOffice will provide OOXML documents. Meaning, governments are not looking at open standards for XML documents as much as they are looking to crack the economic hammer lock Microsoft has on the desktop.
posted by garyedwards

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

There can be no doubt that OOXML, as a standard, has severe flaws. It is incomplete, platform specific, application specific, full of contradictions, fails to adhere to existing standards, untestable, and presents a moving target for any IT worker. There is not an organization in existence, including Microsoft, that promises to actually implement the full standard. Much of this is due to the fact the final version doesn't actually exist on paper yet, but a large fraction is also do to the patchwork nature of the product.

The reason governments and companies wanted a 'office apps' standard in the first place was to release an avalanche of data from aging applications. OOXML shows every appearance of being created to prevent this escape, not enable it. The immaturity of the standard means that it remains a gamble to see if older documents will remain readable or not. The lack of testing means there is no way to determine what docs actually adhere to it or not. The ignoring of existing standards guarantees compatibility problems. All of these factors are handy for the owner of the biggest share of existing documents, as it forces users to continue to use only _their_ application or risk danger from every other quarter.

Tags: iso matusow msoffice ooxml open-standards

Posted by: garyedwards

Microsoft's Great Besmirching | Linux Journal

Tue, 01 Apr 2008 17:57:33 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Of course, all companies try to bend the rules in the their favour, and it would be unfair to pick on Microsoft for doing the same. But what has happened over the last year and a half goes so far beyond the accepted rough and tumble of the standards game that cumulatively it can only be considered as an all-out attack on the machinery of standards-making. Consider the evidence.

Tags: approval corruption iso ooxml open-standards

Posted by: garyedwards

Microsoft OOXML standardization bid: The clock is ticking | All about Microsoft | ZDNet.com

Sat, 29 Mar 2008 07:59:14 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

The battle over OOXML standarization is all about money and marketshare. Microsoft wants OOXML to qualify as an “open standard” so that the company can continue to sell Office into governments that see ISO as the gold standard bearer. Many of the companies that have fought publicly against OOXML gaining ISO standardization approval are hoping that failure of OOXML to get the ISO nod will give them a chance to gain more marketshare in a world where Office still runs on more than 90 percent of Windows desktops.

Tags: approval iso mary-jo odf ooxml

Posted by: garyedwards

The Stockholm Syndrom at ISO | ODF Editor Says ODF Loses If OOXML Does | Slashdot

Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:51:08 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

ISO is bound to the business of "interoperability", and has very strict guidelines for interoperability requirements, that are themselves tied to international trade agreements and legal conventions. In this context, it is beyond surprising that ISO allows the "OASIS PAS" and "Ecma Fast Track" channels to remain open, with specification work remaining under the controlling influence of the vendors.

IMHO, the change in Patrick's position is entirely due to the realization that it is impossible to map between OOXML and ODF. I don't know this for sure, but when i read the German Standards Group (DIN) report on harmonization, authorized by the EU-IDABC and provided to ISO, i couldn't help but wonder how Patrick would react. The report definitively ends his OOXML ODF mapping dream.

Tags: durusau iso microsoft odf ooxml slashdot w3c

Posted by: garyedwards

The Charter Dilemma | ODF Editor Says ODF Loses If OOXML Does | Slashdot

Fri, 28 Mar 2008 18:47:00 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

OOXML on the other hand presents ISO with a very different situation. Because of the way the OOXML - Ecma charter is worded, i don't see how ISO JTC-1 could ever fix the OOXML interoperability problems. ISO approval of OOXML would include acceptance of a charter that defines and limits OOXML interoperability to whatever MSOffice determines it to be. If Patrick and the JTC-1 tried to bring OOXML into compliance with existing ISO Interoperability Requirements, they would have to somehow amend a charter duly approved.

Given that the JTC-1 has yet to address a two year old ISO directive regarding ODF interop compliance, what are the odds they will dare to amend an approved charter? Not good i think.

ISO approval of OOXML is a tragedy for all of us. For sure it's the end of ODF. It's perhaps the end of ISO as a respected standards organization. The issue of open standards itself will become a joke, with the reality of standards by corporation having us all wringing our hands in despair.

Tags: iso odf ooxml w3c

Posted by: garyedwards

Some thoughts on OOXML | Larsblog

Thu, 27 Mar 2008 19:42:06 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

What is to be done?

ISO has in a sense put itself in an awkward position here by already approving the rival OpenDocument format as an ISO standard. This makes it harder to reject OOXML, and at the same time makes it difficult to approve OOXML, since it competes with an existing ISO standard. Generally, I'm unhappy with how closely these two standards are tied to existing software. What I would really have liked to see was for OpenDocument and OOXML both to be dropped, and the two communities to sit down and work out a common agreed format that is not tied to any existing software. The Chinese UOF format, for example, might have served as the starting point for this. ODA has also been suggested. Unfortunately, this requires a political will that does not seem to be present, and so this seems unlikely for now.

Tags: approval iso microsoft msoffice odf ooxml sgml

Posted by: garyedwards

ODF Editor Says ODF Loses If OOXML Does | Slashdot

Thu, 27 Mar 2008 07:29:21 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

IMHO, the change in Patrick's position is entirely due to the realization that it is impossible to map between OOXML and ODF. I don't know this for sure, but when i read the German Standards Group (DIN) report on harmonization, authorized by the EU-IDABC and provided to ISO, i couldn't help but wonder how Patrick would react. The report definitively ends his OOXML ODF mapping dream.

Many wonder why mapping is impossible. I had more than a few discussions with Patrick on this. His point was that a schema is a schema. As long as the syntax and semantics are fully documented, no problemo. My point is that both ODF and OOXML are application specific; and, both are woefully lacking in "semantic" documentation. Add to this problem that both ODF and OOXML lack an interoperability framework with any semblance of compliance teeth, and the whole mapping issue becomes an impossible solution. Especially if interop is the goal.

Tags: durusau iso odf ooxml

Posted by: garyedwards

OOXML vs ODF: where next for interoperability? | Reg Developer

Sat, 22 Mar 2008 00:37:16 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

'A diversion from the real end game – the taking of the internet'

Gary Edwards of the Open Document Foundation has a fascinating post on the important of Microsoft Office compatibility to the success of the ISO-approved Open Document formats.

It is in places a rare voice of sanity:

People continue to insist that if only Microsoft would implement ODF natively in MSOffice, we could all hop on down the yellow brick road, hand in hand, singing kumbaya to beat the band. Sadly, life doesn’t work that way. Wish it did.
Sure, Microsoft could implement ODF - but only with the addition of application specific extensions to the current ODF specification … Sun has already made it clear at the OASIS ODF TC that they are not going to compromise (or degrade) the new and innovative features and implementation model of OpenOffice just to be compatible with the existing 550 million MSOffice desktops.

Tags: foundation iso microsoft odf ooxml w3c

Posted by: garyedwards

garyedwards's Discussions at ZDNet.co.uk Community

Fri, 21 Mar 2008 23:54:28 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

garyedwards's Discussions

Breaking the Web

Talkback: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

Tags: iso microsoft msoffice odf ooxml xaml

Posted by: garyedwards

Once More unto the Breach: Microsoft Discusses Open Standards (versus Open Source Software)

Sun, 16 Mar 2008 21:56:26 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

So here are some "Key Messages" from Microsoft's standards team circa 2003 (doing battle with the Australian parliament no doubt) [Emphasis added]:

An open standard is a publicly available specification which details certain technical functionality that may be implemented in different products and services. It is adopted in an open, consensus-based process and must satisfy other criteria for transparency, ease of access, and broad implementation as described below.
Open standards exist to facilitate interoperability and data exchange across various products and services in a marketplace of multiple, competing implementations, while ensuring that certain minimum requirements are met.
Other types of standards (e.g., “proprietary standards”) and market-based mechanisms exist and are currently used to facilitate interoperability. However, open standards ensure the highest level of interoperability across the widest range of competing products and services.

Tags: brm geneva interoperability iso microsoft odf ooxml open standards

Posted by: garyedwards

Open Malaysia: Geneva, Day Five

Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:51:10 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

We eventually found out that if any changes affected current implementations it would certainly be rejected. This seriously compromised any elegant solutions, and it forced us to be mindful of the "existing corpus of documents" in the wild. I personally don't believe that that should be our problem, but there was a large and vocal voting bloc which would oppose any changes to the spec which would 'break' Ecma 376.

This was why appeasing Ecma had to happen. Even though they rushed their Ecma International Standard, and Microsoft took the risk in shipping Microsoft Office 2007 last year, we now have to bear the burden of having to support its limitations. This also means that future maintenance changes would get harder and harder.

Tags: brm geneva iso odf ooxml opendocument openxml

Posted by: garyedwards

Denmark: OOXML vote won't affect public sector. ODF is too costly! | InfoWorld

Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:51:10 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Lebech said Denmark considers OOXML an open standard, regardless whether it is approved by the ISO. "It would be impossible for us to use only ISO standards if we want to fulfill the goal of creating interoperability in the government sector," he said.

The Danish Parliament also mandated that public agencies consider the cost of using open formats. One of the main reasons OOXML was included is because Denmark is heavily dependent on document management systems that are integrated with Microsoft's Office products, Lebech said.

Denmark also found that requiring agencies to only use ODF would have been too expensive, mostly because of the cost of converting documents into ODF, Lebech said.

"We wouldn't have been able to only support ODF," Lebech said. "It wouldn't have been cost neutral."

Tags: brm denmark geneva iso msoffice odf ooxml opendocment openxml

Posted by: garyedwards

A Savage Journey … ODF at the OOXML BRM « A Frantic Opposition

Fri, 07 Mar 2008 23:51:10 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

A Savage Journey …

‘Erupting from my vivid nightmares into the retro 80s faded luxury of a five-star hotel in Geneva, the pictures of the first victim reappeared on the wall. The head of the Brazilian delegation-it’s only a matter of time now.

My mind thrashes to disentangle the thrown spaghetti threads of blurred reasoning; who’s next, is it just the heads of delegation they are after, any NB member, P-members only?

The fog lifts and it’s worse. Who is behind this, them or us? We outnumber them, but maybe their plan is more devious. Must find Bonky Bob, he’ll know what to do.’

Enough levity for now. The BRM has held few surprises, other than the rather galling situation where I was forced to publicly toe the INCITS line by the temporary head of delegation, a Microsoft employee, against my better judgement.

Tags: brm ecma geneva iso odf ooxml opendocument openxml standards

Posted by: garyedwards

Unbreaking the Web: IE 8 passes ACID 2 Test | John Resig

Fri, 07 Mar 2008 22:17:38 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

IMHO, the key to Microsoft's OOXML strategy can be seen in the recently released MSOffice SDK. The SDK provides a component for the fluid conversion of OOXML to something called fixed/flow. The fixed part of this interesting conjunction is also known as XPS, which is designed as a proprietary alternative to PDF. The flow part is a fascinating and highly proprietary replacement for (X)HTML - CSS.

Reading further through the MSOffice SDK, one can't help but be amazed at the lack of W3C technologies; especially (X)HTML, CSS, XForms and SVG. What we have instead is an entangling cascade of stuff like OOXML, fixed/flow, silverlight, XAML, and WPF. And then there is that recent promise of other high volume API's probably delivered through future Exchange, SharePoint, and MS SQL Server SDK's.

So, at the end of the day, what are we looking at here? IMHO, Microsoft has figured out that the smart thing to do is leverage and extend their existing desktop monopoly into the next generation of cloud computing where the Internet platform rules.

To pull this off, they have a number of problems to overcome; not the least of which is that they need to catch a break on anti trust, and, get OOXML through ISO. And oh yeah, there's that little problem that Windows can't do cloud computing.

Tags: cdf css iso microsoft odf ooxml w3c xhtml

Posted by: garyedwards

Microsoft's OOXML limps through ISO meeting - ZDNet UK

Wed, 05 Mar 2008 07:18:13 -0000

Highlights and Sticky Notes:

Gary Edwards, former president of the Open Document Foundation, an industry group that promoted ODF but then rejected both approaches and closed itself down in November 2007, said: "Ecma and Oasis are vendor consortia where the rules governing standards specification work favour vendor innovation over the open and transparent interoperability consumers, governments and FLOSS efforts demand... Shutting that door on Ecma OOXML is proving very difficult exactly because the primary and fundamental rule of ISO interoperability requirements has been breached."

Tags: brm ecma geneva iso oasis odf ooxml

Posted by: garyedwards