[odf-discuss] Mass may endorse OXML.

[Lars Noodén]

Daniel Carrera wrote:
> This is old news, but I haven't seen any posts on-list (it's been quiet
> lately, I know).

Hmm. I thought I posted a similar article on the topic.  Hopefully it is
just human error.  I am changing mail clients this week and hope I don't
have to go back to the old one which turns out to be more mature and
flexible.

> Massachusetts may endorse Microsoft's OOXML.
> 
> http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20070702101415578
> Any takes on this?

My take is that the spin on the headlines is egregiously incorrect.

The headline is quite wrong or at least premature.  From that and other
articles on the topic I see that nothing has been decided yet. From what
I read it is still in the proposal stage. Furthermore, the proposal is
not about MOOX per se, but a more general attack on the definition of
"open" in the context of data specifications.

Sure, if nothing is done, then MS will browbeat Massachusetts into
accepting MOOX.  But right now Massachusetts is only discussing a
proposal to dilute / destroy the established definition of open
standard.  And though that is a step in forcing MOOX, it is only a step
and even then not yet a done deal.

> Personally I think that two overlapping standards will be harmful to
> competition and I believe that OOXML is much more difficult to implement
> than ODF. I don't really have anything to say that everyone on this list
> doesn't know already.

Pretty much everyone except MS and its boosters have come to a similar
conclusion.  For me, when I looked at the (then) proposal for Ecma 376 I
concluded that it is pretty much unimplementable due to a combination of
volume, complexity and incompleteness.

Anyway, as Chris points out, the new format is irrelevant. It is the
legacy formats (note the plural) and legacy systems that are the
problems. The only prerequisite for interoperability with the old data
formats is access to and use of the full specifications for the old
formats.  Discussing that in the context of any new data formats is at
best a distraction and counterproductive.

To go back to my starting point, the spin on these articles is rather
bad and draws an incorrect conclusion of the current affairs.

Best regards,
-Lars

--
Lars Noodén
Ensure access to your data in the future:
	http://www.noooxml.org/petition/
	http://opendocumentfellowship.org/introduction