[odf-discuss] OOXML: The next step

[marbux]

On Thu, Apr 3, 2008 at 2:35 AM, Pete Harlow <peter.harlow at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 03/04/2008, Inge Wallin <inge at lysator.liu.se> wrote:
>
> > Ok, so we lost the battle this time. But where do we go from here?  I
> > cannot
> > imagine that just because we lost one battle, although a big one, the
> > whole
> > war is lost.
> >
>
It's not. See my article here. <
http://www.universal-interop-council.org/node/24>. International
standardization is only phase 1 of a multi-phase process.

>
> > One idea would be to start lobbying for a conformance test for the ISO
> > OOXML
> > standard and try to make it mandatory that the test be performed for
> > vendors
> > that say that they adhere to the standard.  That would have the effect
> > of
> > exposing MS tactic to define a standard and then not follow it
> > themselves.
> >
>
It's impossible to create a valid conformity assessment procedure for OOXML,
or for ODF for that matter. Both standards allow implementations using app-
and vendor-specific extensions the status of conformance. E.g., OOo uses
some 150 app-specific extensions to ODF. For example, see lines 169-211 on
this OOo source code page. <
http://lxr.go-oo.org/source/sw/sw/source/ui/uno/SwXDocumentSettings.cxx>.
OOXML (at least the pre-vote version submitted by Ecma) includes 573
"future" extension points identified in Part 4 (the schema) by the exLst
attribute that have no specifications for functionality whatsoever.

Ecma 376 literally had zero conformance requirements. Its conformance
section (in Part 1) was simply a lengthy essay on why conformance
requirements were undesirable. I understand from a couple of press reports
that ISO requirements keywords were added to the Ecma spec at the BRM, but
we won't be able to assess the impact of that change until we see the
completed spec. But judging from the Ecma Responses to NB comments and the
fact that very few other changes were made to the spec, I strongly suspect
that in terms of being able to develop a conformity assessment procedure,
the situation is unchanged.

Short story here: push for a conformity assessment procedure for OOXML and
you'll immediately be pushed back to provide a link to the conformity
assessment procedure is for ODF. You'll be left flat-footed, because there
is none.

My 2 cents,

Paul
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.opendocumentfellowship.com/pipermail/odf-discuss/attachments/20080403/ca5b5fbf/attachment.html