Open Document Format Approved 399
An anonymous reader writes "The OASIS Group announces that the third Committee Draft [PDF] of the Open Document Format for Office Applications (OpenDocument) v1.0 Specification has been approved
as an OASIS Standard. The submission of the approved standard can be found at here.
The OpenDocument format is intended to provide an open alternative to proprietary document formats including the popular DOC, XLS, and PPT formats used by Microsoft Office. Organizations and individuals that store their data in an open format avoid being locked in to a single software vendor, leaving them free to switch software if their current vendor goes out of business or changes their software or licensing terms to something less favorable."
The OpenDocument format is intended to provide an open alternative to proprietary document formats including the popular DOC, XLS, and PPT formats used by Microsoft Office. Organizations and individuals that store their data in an open format avoid being locked in to a single software vendor, leaving them free to switch software if their current vendor goes out of business or changes their software or licensing terms to something less favorable."
Probably doomed (Score:2, Insightful)
Nice! (Score:4, Insightful)
What are the criteria for approving standards by the OASIS group? Is there any guarantee on the quality of the standard itself?
patent trouble (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm not convinced this will work (Score:5, Insightful)
For this system to work, every office app needs to adopt this file format. That way, companies can theoretically switch between vendors. Why would Microsoft, who already have the lion's share of the office market include this format? That would surely be shooting themselves in the feet.
If there were, say, three competing office suites each with 33% of the market share, then you could understand them wanting to include support for this format - companies would demand that the app supported them or switch to an alternative. However, when one office suite controls anything in the region of up to 96% of the market share, it'll take a lot more than a common open file format to persuade the average business to move away from a program that is pretty much the standard, whether we like it or not.
Nice but (Score:5, Insightful)
Which they, most obviously, won't.
However, I applaud this group for at least trying. However the realistic cynic in me says that we're not going to see many gains. Hell, the average user in a company doesn't know of and has never been exposed to anything else but Word, Powerpoint and Excel.
If that's the sort of minimal marketshare the competition occupies, it's going to be a tough battle.
Re:Probably doomed (Score:5, Insightful)
MS isn't afraid. (Score:3, Insightful)
Integration (Score:5, Insightful)
Since this format is Open, there are no limitations to integrating it into other products such as CMS system, reports (which is more common than you'd expect) and all sorts of other tools which a business uses.
If this integration reaches a certain critical mass where it becomes too much of an advantage for businesses to ignore, MS will have no choice but to adopt it.
A glimpse into the future (Score:5, Insightful)
OPENOFFICE: Okay, we've included it. Now you can read and write to this new open format!
MICROSOFT: We've just added support for the new format too. You can read all open format Word Processor documents in Word. We didn't include a function to write to an open document - our users don't want that kind of complication.
OPENOFFICE: Let's sit back and wait for this open file format to kick start the OpenOffice adoption!
CONSUMER: Microsoft just offered us Office free for 5 years when they found out we were considering an open source alternative to our operating system. Word can even read all these open format files we have created in OpenOffice - let the migration begin!
OPENOFFICE: Oh dear.
Will this make a difference? (Score:5, Insightful)
Everybody (/. readers not included) uses MS Office. Why? Because it is a 'standard'. OK, its a lousy standard. In fact, its more of a moving target than a standard, but the trick is that nobody knows this.
Sure they know that sometimes when they put their file on a floppy disk and put that in the post to send to their collegue half way across the office that sometimes it looks a bit different to how it looked on their computer, but then thats how computers are!?!
People don't know what word processor is unless its Word. They are taught it in school. They are taught in college and they are taught it in night classes. Its what employers want to see on CVs. People freek when they see PDFs. People freak when they see RTFs! Why? Because on windows they don't have a blue 'W' on them that lets them know its a word processing docuement.
The .doc is here for the long haul. It has survived every attempt by microsoft to improve it. It has survived some glaring security holes and it will continue to do this because consumers are not offered an alternative that they understand and that remains word compatible.
Yup, and you know what? (Score:5, Insightful)
Okay, yeah, I'm sure there's probably some tiny niche somewhere this fills. But the rest of us are going to have to ignore this new thingy and just continue shipping around
There was a period some years ago, when I first started looking for work, that I didn't have a copy of Microsoft Word, so I would send out my resume as an HTML file, or a PDF, or if it seemed appropriate both. Over this period, most of the time when I sent my resume out, the response-- even when the sent file was just an HTML file, that you double click and it opens in MSIE-- was "I can't figure out how to open your resume, do you have a
This might have some uses (Score:5, Insightful)
This of course depends on whether the standard gains some credibility. Perhaps IBM could have a stab at Microsoft by declaring their wholehearded support for the standard.
Re:Probably doomed (Score:5, Insightful)
I expect them to embrace it in their usual way. They will provide an input filter so their software is compatible with it. (it can open it).
Expect a few roadblocks on exporting to it.
Clippy, "I see you are trying to export a document. You will loose your macro's and formatting if you do. Do you wish to continue?"
If you select yes, expect everything from font selection, to headers and footers, to paragraphs, photo layout, etc., will need re-done in the other simplistic software. In short, it'll import, but editing and saving in a non-MS format will have problems. Expect MS to treat it like ANSI text.
Re:Nice but (Score:4, Insightful)
As always, I end with my favourite link that I like to post in situations such as these. If you are cheered by the spectacle of a politician thoroughly demolishing Microsoft FUD, read on!
http://www.opensource.org/docs/peru_and_ms.php [opensource.org]
Re:Ironic (Score:5, Insightful)
Re:MS and Open Document Format... (Score:3, Insightful)
MS Licensing and the long term (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:patent trouble (Score:4, Insightful)
In any case, suing open-source projects like OpenOffice or KOffice doesn't help Microsoft at all. The lawsuit will be extended, not unlike IBM and SCO. With IBM, Novell, RedHat and others relying on projects such as these office suites to help them provide alternatives for their customers, they'd most likely join the suit to make sure that they don't lose a project critical to Linux's growing adoption.
In the best case scenario, those products are taken off the market in the US, and other countries where they sue, and win. That would leave many parts of Asia, Africa and South America, which are Microsoft's biggest targets as those places are developing quickly.
In the worst case scenario, they lose respectability for suing a legitimate project, further adding to the claims of monopolistic tendencies against them. Reputation and respectability aid trust, which is critical for software houses.
I don't believe Microsoft will sue. I hope for their own sake, they don't.
Microsoft and format compatibility (Score:5, Insightful)
I suspect that one of the (admittedly several) reasons that Word managed to knock out Wordperfect so many years ago was that Wordperfect didn't make a huge effort to be compatible with the competition. WordPerfect Corporation took its users for granted, and it was very slow off the blocks in a lot of ways.
Microsoft went to a lot of effort to make Word as compatible as possible with Wordperfect files, just as OpenOffice and several others are doing now, but Wordperfect Corporation didn't go to as much effort in returning the favour for Microsoft Word. My understanding is that it was more like 95% compatibility for a long time. The end result was that Word could cleanly deal with two formats, but Wordperfect could only reliably deal with its own.
The consequence? Once Word documents had reached a critical mass due to certain "other" reasons, people tended to go for the application that would allow them to easily deal with both types of documents rather than only Wordperfect files. This, of course, turned out to be Microsoft Word, and adoption of it was accelerated.
OpenDocument may not be quite the same situation, because with the OpenDocument format being... well... open, it wouldn't necessarily be too difficult for Microsoft to add support if everyone suddenly decided that they wanted it. This would be a victory in itself for other office applications, though, because it would immediately give Word-using businesses and governments the opportunity of distributing files that more people than just Word users can reliably access.
If there's a critical mass of non-Word users (which could even be a combination of Openoffice, Koffice, and whatever else), it's enough reason for many organisations to seriously consider what their standard document formats should be.
Re:Probably doomed (Score:4, Insightful)
Even then they would probably try and sabotage it - be slightly incompatible (make sure that the exported data has some "extra bits" in that only M$ can really make heads or tails of - or introduce other little incompatibilities...
Big deal...
That's called XSLT! (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Yup, and you know what? (Score:2, Insightful)
What does that have to do with anything? Because you were applying for a tech job, everybody in HR should be technical, as well?
For their part, they were probably thinking it was pretty scary that a job applicant would be so dumb to submit their resume in anything but
Would I prefer that an open format be the preferred format? Sure. But that's a decision I can make when I'm in charge. It would be arrogant and counterproductive to try to impose that decision on people I'm trying to make happy.
Microsoft's Reaction (Score:0, Insightful)
I'll just go ahead and quietly print this off and send it on over to the patent office.
*later*
You're Honor... I have indisputable evidence that the OSS community is in direct voilation of MY copywrite and I demand no less than a billion dollars.
*later - Bill swimming in his money*
Another day... another OSS project patanted and sued.
Re:Probably doomed (Score:4, Insightful)
Congratulations, you've just re-invented XML/CSS/XSLT/XSL-FO, and are entitled to a cigar or coconut according to choice :-)
Might not be a problem for them (Score:3, Insightful)
You can get a sense for what would be a reasonable strategy by considering this: there already is a widely implemented, open file format for word processing: RTF. But it doesn't support stylesheets, among other things.
So, the way to make sure an open format doesn't catch on is to put a bunch of features in your word procesor, which have to be supported by the file format, that aren't in the open specification. Saving and reloading that format is going to feel a bit unnatural, since information natural to the operation of Word will be missing. The file format will be perceived as crippled.
Re:.Doc will go the way of .BMP and .Gif (Score:3, Insightful)
BTW, did you check the image format of the Slashdot images? The Google logo? The ebay logo/icons? The Yahoo logo/icons? For a format on the way out, GIF is still used a lot.
Re:.doc won't go away (Score:4, Insightful)
Over and over again I see the same arguments - "OO.o would be great if it did a perfect job of importing/ exporting Word documents"; "Linux would be great if it supported al the printers at Walmart and ran all my Windows software and had loads of games" and every single time I roll my eyes at the...I don't now...arrogance? of people who propound these views as if the Linux/ FOSS community were so stupid and blind that these issues never occurred to them. Honestly, if I see one more whiner ascend to the pulpit and screech at the FOSS community about how the salvation of Linux rests upon [insert blindingly obvious statement here], apparently expecting them to say..."Well, gee, that guy's absolutely right! How did we not think of this before! All hail our new glorious leader!" I'll scream :)
Anyway, rant over - sorry about that, it wasn't aimed at you personally, my friend :)
Anyway, to address your statements more civilly: I'm sure the OO.o developers are acutely aware that they need to import/ export to MS's formats in order to be successful (I'm guessing that they are harangued about it by users every minute of the day, probably with e-mails like "Why do you expect people to use your crappy software when it cannot even open my Word documents. You're hopeless!"). The problem is that it is hard as fuck to interoperate with them as they are closed, messy formats that must be reverse-engineered - a very tricky, time-consuming task. While I'm at it - the Linux community would love to support all the hardware under the sun, expect that hardware manufacturers simply will not provide drivers nor the specs necessary for the community to write their own; Linux won't run all Windows software perfectly as the apps are not written to be portable in the first place so they are forced to re-implement Microsoft's API based on scant documentation (a Herculean effort); and games won't run because games writers use the proprietary DirectX instead of OpenGL and have no interest in aiding porting to Linux.
Phew - that felt good :) For a little more on my opinion on why .doc needs to die and be replaced with a decent format, see here:
http://slashdot.org/comments.pl?sid=148300&cid=124 30161 [slashdot.org]
Oh, and the whole "Embrace and Extend" is a dirty, underhanded scheme designed to stifle competition, and I hope than the OO.o developers never engage in it.
Microsoft will not sue (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:I'm not convinced this will work (Score:3, Insightful)
Remember the trick with Microsoft Wordpad? each time a
Microsoft could pull the same trick with the OpenDocument format. It could support it very well, but everytime the user saves the document, a message box notifies the user that the document's format will be incompatible with the rest of the Office applications, or with COM, or some never-used feature X of Word will not be available, etc, thus killing the OpenDocument format in a nice way.
MS will adopt this... (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Probably doomed (Score:3, Insightful)
Works in other walks of life too, BTW.
Unless there is a clear monetary insentive to it, it will not be done properly. The "command and control" methods are not very effective.
Re:MSFT a sponsor (Score:4, Insightful)
Old saying: "Keep you're friends close, and you're enemies closer". (Sorry, origin unknown.) The best way MSFT has to "poison the well" of any new document standard that might encroach upon their monopolistic business plan is from the inside. How better to nudge the standards one way or another in a manner that guarantees ither non-adoption or adopting "the MSFT way"? (Remember how MSFT dealt with OpenGL, Java, and Kerberos?)
MSFT has "embraced" XML as a standard, and then wrapped it in an encrypted binary encapsulation.
The "extended" standard is then protected by DMCA and IP, with "open" licensing encumbered with NDA and SDK/source distribution limitations. "Their" XML format may be "opened" by other programs, but not "saved" by those other programs. This helps to preserve their monopoly status, as well as providing any/all proof needed (by the EU) that MSFT will not play fair, and must be punished.
Re:More user friendly file extensions? (Score:2, Insightful)
One person's prognostications (Score:3, Insightful)
1) All of the OTHER office programs now have a common format to use, and third parties have a standard 'input' for other processing - such as automatically making html, pdf, docbook, or some other format. With one well-documented standard, each tool can concentrate on doing one thing well.
2) Microsoft won't budge on this until they feel the heat from their customers - so people who care must start educating people. The more people who start asking for this format, the more pressure Microsoft will feel. The average joe isn't going to be able to put much pressure, but what if a big contract at the Department of Defense included a requirement that said, "All deliverables must be in OpenDocument format."? The companies bidding on that contract sure would care... And SAIC, Lockheed Martin, etc can put a LOT of pressure on Microsoft.
3) If Microsoft expressed any interest, it will initially be as a 'migration path away from all those inferior products', and they will read the format perfectly. They won't allow users to save in that format without the pressure I mention above, and even when they do, it will probably be buggy, and throw up so many 'Warning: You are saving your document in OpenDocument. That may cause you to lose page formatting' messages that users will have no faith in the OpenDocument format.
Don't give up the battle yet - the fun is just beginning!
Re:A glimpse into the future (Score:3, Insightful)
OPENOFFICE: Oh dear.
I think the last line here was supposed to read.
OPENOFFICE: Alright then, see ya in five years, suckers. Microsoft isn't going to give you a free ride FOREVER--they can't afford to. But we can, and we'll be waiting for you.
Re:.doc won't go away (Score:2, Insightful)
But unfortunately, this is the killer issue that prevents me from upgrading to Open Office. I suspect it is the same for others.
It's a lot like the Intel 386 instruction set. It has many warts, and in the 80s Intel's competitors invented better ones. But the sticky glue just won't go away. Now, Intel's biggest competitor (AMD) accepts this instruction set, and works with it, and mostly us customers just breathe a sigh of relief.
Re:Nice! (Score:3, Insightful)
Good point. Is anybody talking to the WordPerfect folks? We want the lawyers on our side (and they all use WordPerfect).
If there's no significant advantage to the WordPerfect file format, and this file format is really good, they ought to adopt it as their next verison's default format. As should AbiWord, OpenOffice, Pages, et al.
With significant momentum and real freedom behind this format, governments will inevitably follow. If Apple gets in line maybe Al Gore can place a few calls.
If these projects can't see that proprietary file formats are keeping Office at the top of the hill they need to think about it some more. If these projects are hoping to not support this format for the sake of locking in users, they deserve the same treatment that Office gets.
Wasn't RMS's response to an invite to Redmond, "how 'bout you open your file formats first?"
Re:Nice! (Score:2, Insightful)