The Most Important Reason OOXML Should Be Defeated
More than any technical or political reason, the biggest reason we should hope that Microsoft’s new format, OOXML, is not standardized is simply that it is our best hope for finally achieving one standard document format.
For some time, the debate over OOXML has been going on. A while ago it was put on the fast track ISO approval process. Before it could become a standard, though, several countries filed complaints, stalling approval until those complaints can be resolved or discarded.
Most of the arguments thrown around have focused on the technical aspects and flaws of OOXML. The truth is, though, that the sooner everyone can standardize on a single format the better, and OOXML’s failure to become an ISO standard would be the fastest way to that.
Recently I was caught with three versions of a document to which I needed to make some small changes. I had a printed version, a version saved out of Microsoft Office 2007 (for the record, I made that document on someone else’s computer), and a version saved in the Open Document format (ODF). Unfortunately, where I was, I only had access to Microsoft Office 2003 and no ability to install software. In the end, I had to retype the document off of the printed version. This simply should not be necessary. If there was a single, universally supported document format, this problem would not have occurred. Really, a standard document format is in everyone’s interest, except possibly Microsoft’s.
So how would OOXML’s failiure as a standard lead to a single standard? Microsoft has already announced moves to incorporate ODF into future versions of Office. This is most likely a saftey net, in case OOXML is defeated. This certainly suggests that, if OOXML does in fact fail to receive ISO standardization, Microsoft is ready to adopt ODF. Once Microsoft has adopted ODF, already OpenOffice’s preferred format, other small players (such as Apple) will be quick to adopt it.
Is it possible to finally standardize on a single format if OOXML wins? Yes, it is, but it will likely take a lot longer and a lot more fighting. We have a chance to end this mess now, and we should take it. We should also realize that this does not in any way benefit only the open-source people. This benefits everyone. With Microsoft’s fairly recent release of Office 2007, which yet again changed the default save format, average consumers and even some of the computer illiterate are running up against the wall created by constantly changing, selectively supported file formats. We have a chance to end this entire problem now. Why wait?
September 6th, 2008 at 3:57 pm
Erm, sorry to be one to break it to you, but OOXML has been an ISO standard for almost three weeks!
See http://www.iso.org/iso/pressrelease.htm?refid=Ref1151.
It a travesty every which way you look at it, but it looks like its a done deal now
September 7th, 2008 at 1:29 pm
“I had a printed version, a version saved out of Microsoft Office 2007 (for the record, I made that document on someone else’s computer), and a version saved in the Open Document format (ODF). Unfortunately, where I was, I only had access to Microsoft Office 2003 and no ability to install software.”
So… that means you also must not have had a machine with a copy of any software that would have read the ODF version of the document either. And since you couldn’t install any software, you couldn’t download a copy [e.g. "Open Office"] to use on that machine. You were stuck re-typing.
Let’s say that the Office2007 version of the document didn’t exist either. You’d still have had to re-type it because an ODF-compatible program was not on the computer, and you had “no ability to install software.”
I’m sorry, but that part of your story seems a bit of a red-herring. Don’t get me wrong, I am NOT a fan of Microsoft and definitely not of Office 2007. But you had a document in two newer formats (ODF and pseudo-OOXML) and ONLY complain that the MSO2007 version was unreadable (when both were) seems… well, silly.
As I noted above, I’m not a fan of Microsoft. I’ve personally installed OOo on over a dozen of machines at work, and I use it virtually exclusively over the pre-installed MSO2000 that most of the office uses. I only use OOo (a beta of 3.0) at home, with excellent compatibility toward my co-workers files. I run Linux or MacOS at home, and I’ve clandestinely installed a dual-boot of XP & Linux on my PC at work (some things just work a lot easier on Linux) but run XP all but about 1 hr/week at work.
Despite our IT department head insisting that we should all be moving to MSO2007, there are actually fewer machines at work with it installed than with OOo 2.4 – most who received the “upgrade” bitched so much that it was removed and MSO2000 was re-installed. I work for a non-profit, and most of our PCs have processors running well under 1GHz, so Vista & MSO2007 are really out of their league in terms of processing requirements.
As noted in another post, the ISO has given its blessing to this stillborn child of Microsoft. Nevertheless, some countries have now rejected the idea that this “standard” is valid and will not use OOXML in their governmental documentation. BRAVO! I wish more nations would get some cojones and do the same. See -
http://www.consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/article.php?story=20080901094932564