Linked by David Adams on Sat 17th May 2008 03:35 UTC, submitted by fsmag
Microsoft Peter Hintgens, writing at Freesoftware Magazine, explains why the adoption of Microsoft's OOXML as an ISO standard is a dreadful development, and explains how some open standards partisans are organizing to combat insufficiently-open "open" standards.
Thread beginning with comment 314589
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Quality
by Alleister on Sat 17th May 2008 06:51 UTC
Alleister
Member since:
2006-05-29

Come one, Microsoft users. If even Microsoft isn't capable to correctly implement that "standard" in its products, it simply can't be a very good standard then, can it?

Reply Score: 6

RE: Quality
by Jezza on Sat 17th May 2008 06:54 in reply to "Quality"
Jezza Member since:
2005-10-13

While I agree with the sentiment of this (and I doubt MS will ever correct this problem)

OOo doesn't implement ODF correctly either.

I'm sure Koffice and OOo etc... will implement the OASIS standard fine in future, but neither of the "standards" have a fully working implementation anywhere.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: Quality
by segedunum on Sun 18th May 2008 08:56 in reply to "RE: Quality"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

OOo doesn't implement ODF correctly either.

I here this oft repeated, daft remark time and time again, and it's usually used as some kind of bizarre justification for Microsoft to go off and implement their own OOXML format in Office, and it makes it all OK. It's quite funny as well, because it's an admission that Office 2007 is not OOXML compatible as the specification is now.

With ODF, people involved with Open Office, KOffice and other software are continually contributing to successive versions of ODF, and no, they're not going to have all of it implemented right now. However, there is an awful lot that has been implemented that is common between different implementations of ODF, and there are test suites and coverage reports available so you can verify how far they have got.

Can Microsoft provide that? Is there a coverage report and test suite for OOXML and Office? Considering that OOXML has been set in stone before it was ever submitted to the ECMA, and no changes have ever been made to it and no successive versions have ever been made, one would have thought that Microsoft would have had a fighting chance of implementing OOXML in Office, per their own specification, properly, no?

Edited 2008-05-18 08:57 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE: Quality
by PlatformAgnostic on Sat 17th May 2008 09:44 in reply to "Quality"
PlatformAgnostic Member since:
2006-01-02

Microsoft appears to have properly supported the ECMA version of the standard in the released Office 2007 product. It will obviously support the final version when the standard is released and the release wave (perhaps a service pack) comes out.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Quality
by segedunum on Tue 20th May 2008 18:03 in reply to "RE: Quality"
segedunum Member since:
2005-07-06

Microsoft appears to have properly supported the ECMA version of the standard in the released Office 2007 product.

There's a lot of evidence to suggest otherwise, and this is the only way that people can go about verifying what OOXML as in Office 2007 is implemented:

http://ooxmlisdefectivebydesign.blogspot.com/

It will obviously support the final version when the standard is released and the release wave (perhaps a service pack) comes out.

What final version would this be? We already have it. There have been no successive versions of OOXML submitted to either the ECMA or ISO, and there is no timetable of improvements that Microsoft is going to make as a result of the review sessions and the list of objections.

OOXML was basically granted ISO status on the promise that all those objections could be fixed later. No such undertaking to fix anything has happened.

Reply Parent Score: 2