Group items tagged online - OpenDocument

2More

Most Business Tech Pros Wary About Web 2.0 Tools In Business - Technology News by Infor... - 0 views

shared by Gary Edwards on 06 Mar 07 - Cached

How should an IT team start thinking about an Enterprise 2.0 strategy? One way is to carve it into two main areas. The first is Web-based information sharing--think business versions of Wikipedia, MySpace, and Flickr. A sizable minority of companies are finding effective business uses for blogs, wikis, syndicated feeds, pervasive search, social networking, collaborative content portals like SharePoint, and mashups that use easier-to-integrate APIs and fast-response development techniques such as Ajax. One example: Wikis, which let multiple people access and edit a document online, are widely used at 6% of companies in our survey and used effectively by a few employees at 25% of companies. The second area is voice and messaging, where voice over IP, instant messaging, presence, videoconferencing, and unified communications can make it possible to connect people in more relevant ways. Unified communications entails the blending of voice calls, video, and messages, coupled with functionality like embedded click-to-call links in documents and contact lists and the ability to see if colleagues and partners are available to chat. It's widely used at 13% of companies surveyed and effectively by a few at 24%.
...

Cancel

Gary Edwards on 06 Mar 07

Great coverage from InformationWeek about the emerging Enterprise 2.0 arena. Author Michael Hoover does not get too deep into the Information Processing Chain, as exampled by the integrated Vista Stack of desktop, server, device,Internet systems and services. But he provides a more than adequate framework for evaluating chain components.

As the ODF - OOXML battle contiues to expand, engulfing swallowing and swamping near everythign in it's path, the day is not too far off when the battle will move to the center of Enterprise 2.0 considerations. It has to. XML Hubs are how these converging technologies are going to be gathered, integrated and configured to impact rapidly changing business processes. There has to be a universal transport in these systems that all applications can work, and nothig matches the highly portable and interactive document/data capabilities of ODF and OOXML. They alone own the desktop prodcutivity environment migration to XML. And it will be through XML - RDF/XML that the Hubs finally integrate the flow of information between desktops, servers, devices and Internet systems.

~ge~

<div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">Great coverage from InformationWeek about the emerging Enterprise 2.0 arena. Author Michael Hoover does not get too deep into the Information Processing Chain, as exampled by the integrated Vista Stack of desktop, server, device,Internet systems and services. But he provides a more than adequate framework for evaluating chain components.<br><br>As the ODF - OOXML battle contiues to expand, engulfing swallowing and swamping near everythign in it's path, the day is not too far off when the battle will move to the center of Enterprise 2.0 considerations. It has to. XML Hubs are how these converging technologies are going to be gathered, integrated and configured to impact rapidly changing business processes. There has to be a universal transport in these systems that all applications can work, and nothig matches the highly portable and interactive document/data capabilities of ODF and OOXML. They alone own the desktop prodcutivity environment migration to XML. And it will be through XML - RDF/XML that the Hubs finally integrate the flow of information between desktops, servers, devices and Internet systems.<br><br>~ge~<br><br></div>

...

Cancel

2More

Open Document Foundation Gives Up | Linux Magazine - 0 views

www.linux-magazine.com/...n_document_foundation_gives_up cdf odf ooxml w3c

shared by Gary Edwards on 16 Nov 07 - Cached

The reasons for the move to CDF was improved compatibility with Microsoft’s OOXML format the foundation claimed at the time. Cris Lilley from W3C contradicted. CDF is not an office format, and thus not an alternative to the Open Document Format. This turn-down is likely the reason for the abrupt ditching of the foundation.
...

Cancel

Gary Edwards on 16 Nov 07

I've got to give this one extra points for creativity! All anyone has to do is visit the W3C web sites for CDF WICD Full 1.0 to realize that there is in fact a CDf profile for desktops. CDF WICD Mobile is the profile for devices.

My guess is that Chris Lilley is threading the needle here. IBM, Groklaw, and the lawyer for OASIS have portrayed the Foundation's support for CDF WICD Full as a replacement for ODF - as in native file format for OpenOffice kind of replacement. Mr. Lilley insists that CDF WiCD Full was not designed for that purpose. It's for export only! As in a conversion of native desktop file formats.

Which is exactly what the da Vinci group was doing with MSOffice. The Foundation's immediate interest in CDF WICD was based on the assumption that a similar conversion would be possible between OpenOffice ODF and CDF WICD.

The Foundation's thinking was that if the da Vinci group could convert MSOffice documents and processes to CDF WICD Full, and, a similar conversion of OpenOffice ODF documents and processes to CDF WICD could be done, then near ALL desktop documents could be converted into a highly interoperable web platform ready format.

Web platform ready documents from OpenOffice? What's not to like? And because the conversion between ODF and CDF WICD Full is so comparatively clean, OpenOffice would in effect, (don't go native file format now) become ahighly integrated rich client end user interface to advancing web platforms.

The Foundation further reasoned that this conversion of OpenOffice ODF to CDF WICD Full would solve many of the extremely problematic interoperability problems that plague ODF. Once the documents are in CDF WICD Full, they are cloud ready and portable at a level certain to diminish the effects of desktop applications specific feature sets and implementation models.

In Massachusetts, the Foundation took

<div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">I've got to give this one extra points for creativity! All anyone has to do is visit the W3C web sites for CDF WICD Full 1.0 to realize that there is in fact a CDf profile for desktops. CDF WICD Mobile is the profile for devices.<br><br>My guess is that Chris Lilley is threading the needle here. IBM, Groklaw, and the lawyer for OASIS have portrayed the Foundation's support for CDF WICD Full as a replacement for ODF - as in native file format for OpenOffice kind of replacement. Mr. Lilley insists that CDF WiCD Full was not designed for that purpose. It's for export only! As in a conversion of native desktop file formats.<br><br>Which is exactly what the da Vinci group was doing with MSOffice. The Foundation's immediate interest in CDF WICD was based on the assumption that a similar conversion would be possible between OpenOffice ODF and CDF WICD.<br><br>The Foundation's thinking was that if the da Vinci group could convert MSOffice documents and processes to CDF WICD Full, and, a similar conversion of OpenOffice ODF documents and processes to CDF WICD could be done, then near ALL desktop documents could be converted into a highly interoperable web platform ready format.<br><br>Web platform ready documents from OpenOffice? What's not to like? And because the conversion between ODF and CDF WICD Full is so comparatively clean, OpenOffice would in effect, (don't go native file format now) become ahighly integrated rich client end user interface to advancing web platforms.<br><br>The Foundation further reasoned that this conversion of OpenOffice ODF to CDF WICD Full would solve many of the extremely problematic interoperability problems that plague ODF. Once the documents are in CDF WICD Full, they are cloud ready and portable at a level certain to diminish the effects of desktop applications specific feature sets and implementation models.<br><br>In Massachusetts, the Foundation took</div>

...

Cancel

2More

Joshua : Web is THE Platform? SRSLY? : MIX Online - Flock - 0 views

visitmix.com/...web-is-the-platform-srsly cdf open-web xhtml

shared by Gary Edwards on 22 Oct 07 - Cached

The web is the platform upon which many different and incompatible data gardens will do battle.  There WILL be fights, winners and losers, and this will happen BECAUSE the web is the platform.  If anyone is really serious about reducing the bloodshed and adhering to the spirit of the web, they should put their money where their mouths are and let loose some of the control from their own walled gardens and incompatible schemas.
...

Cancel

Gary Edwards on 22 Oct 07

The W3C is the keeper of the Open Web Platform, and they are coming under assault from a number of initiatives. Of course there is Microsoft and the emerging MS Stack that runs on proprietary alternatives and bastardized eXtensions of W3C Open Web technoloigies. MS-OOXML is perhaps the most serious challenge to the W3C and HTML yet. Adobe has weighed in with Flash, Flex, and AIR. But Google as a threat?

Joshua focuses in on the Google Web 2.0 Presentation and finds that Google Gadgets are not W3C technologies available to all. Then he has this great line summarizing that the war against the Open Web is really about different data gardens doing battle on the platform used by all and owned by none.

I hope Joshua and the other Open Web defenders are paying close attention to MS-OOXML and the emerging MS Stack. Certainly Microsoft is building a walled garden of applications, services and data. The question is, will the MS Stack garner enough critical mass to break the Open Web?

<div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">The W3C is the keeper of the Open Web Platform, and they are coming under assault from a number of initiatives. Of course there is Microsoft and the emerging MS Stack that runs on proprietary alternatives and bastardized eXtensions of W3C Open Web technoloigies. MS-OOXML is perhaps the most serious challenge to the W3C and HTML yet. Adobe has weighed in with Flash, Flex, and AIR. But Google as a threat? <br><br>Joshua focuses in on the Google Web 2.0 Presentation and finds that Google Gadgets are not W3C technologies available to all. Then he has this great line summarizing that the war against the Open Web is really about different data gardens doing battle on the platform used by all and owned by none.<br><br>I hope Joshua and the other Open Web defenders are paying close attention to MS-OOXML and the emerging MS Stack. Certainly Microsoft is building a walled garden of applications, services and data. The question is, will the MS Stack garner enough critical mass to break the Open Web?<br><br></div>

...

Cancel

2More

The Office question 2007 | Rough Type: Nicholas Carr's Blog: - 0 views

www.roughtype.com/...the_office_ques.php collaboration interoperability office office20 w3c web

shared by Gary Edwards on 18 Dec 07 - Cached

As I argued in my post Office Generations last year, we're in the early stages of the "hybrid phase" of personal productivity applications, when most people will use web apps to extend rather than replace their old Office apps. This phase will play out over a number of years as the web technologies mature, at which point it will become natural to use purely web-based apps (with, probably, continued local caching of data and program code). What this means is that Microsoft has a good opportunity to maintain Office's dominance during the switchover by pursuing what it calls its "software plus services" strategy. But Microsoft should be anything but complacent right now. Maintaining market dominance does not necessarily mean maintaining traditional levels of profitability. The biggest threat posed by online alternatives may well be to undermine Microsoft's pricing power - a trend we're already seeing in the student market.
- Gary Edwards on 18 Dec 07
  
  It's all about interoperability and functionality without disruption to existing business processes.
  
  <div class="cArrow"> </div><div class="cContentInner">It's all about interoperability and functionality without disruption to existing business processes.</div>
  
  ...
  
  Cancel
...

Cancel