Linux and Open Source

Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols & Paula Rooney
Home / News & Blogs / Linux and Open Source

Microsoft OOXML opponents won't back down

By | June 4, 2008, 6:44am PDT

Summary: If Microsoft wants its standard to stand on equal footing with the ODF, it needs to stop embedding closed binary objects in the Office format, and stop treating it as proprietary.

Hillary ClintonAfter Hillary Clinton spoke last night I listened closely for what the loudspeakers would play.

It was Tom Petty’s hit “I Won’t Back Down.” (UPDATE: Clinton did back down Wednesday, with the official announcement now expected in two stages Friday and Saturday. OOXML opponents, meanwhile, fight on.)

This is also the theme song for opponents of Office Open XML (OOXML). The Microsoft Office format may be an ISO standard, but opponents won’t back down and will keep fighting it.

This is the first ever appeal of such a standards ruling, notes Rick Jelliffe. He has a long post at O’Reilly on the issues and the process, but it comes to this. ODF supporters have as much chance of overturning this as Clinton does of overturning her rejection.

Which does not mean there isn’t any recourse, in either case. And the answer is also the same in both cases.

It lies with the winner.

If Microsoft wants its standard to stand on equal footing with the ODF, it needs to stop embedding closed binary objects in the Office format, and stop treating it as proprietary.

Recognizing the other side, offering a real concession, is often the only way for a winner to achieve real closure. Convincing the other side that the concession is real and worthwhile is the art of business and politics.

Kick off your day with ZDNet's daily e-mail newsletter. It's the freshest tech news and opinion, served hot. Get it.

More from “Linux and Open Source”

Topics

Concession, Microsoft Corp., Hillary Clinton, Office Open XML, OpenDocument Format, Opponent, OpenDocument Format (ODF), Emerging Technologies, Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for 30 years, a tech freelancer since 1983.

Disclosure

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a journalist, writer and part-time futurist for over 30 years.

At the present moment I run only a personal blog in addition to my ZDNet open source blog.

DanaBlankenhorn.Com has the subtitle The War Against Oil. In the past I have used it to write about political history, e-commerce, personal matters, some ideas related to open source, and The World of Always On, which is the idea of using sensors, motes and RFID to turn WiFi links into platforms for applications which live in the air.

My IRA account at Schwab holds a few tech shares, most notably some Intel and Applied Materials, but there are no open source companies in it. I don’t even own any CBS stock.

Biography

Dana Blankenhorn

Dana Blankenhorn has been a business journalist for nearly 25 years and has covered the online world professionally since 1985. He founded the Interactive Age Daily for CMP Media, and has written for the Chicago Tribune, Advertising Age's "NetMarketing" supplement, and dozens of other publications over the years.

Related Discussions on TechRepublic

Did you know you can take part in these discussions with your ZDNet membership?
Ask a Question Start a Discussion
24
Comments
Add Your Opinion

Join the conversation!

Just In

Whether it cheated along the way is not at issue.
tracy anne 8th Jun 2008
Actually it is, that is the point of the EU investigation to the ISO process on accepting OOXML, it is also the point of the objections, which also are about the process.

The entire process, of accepting OOXML, seems seriously flawed, with numerous reported irregularities. Each of the appeals are with reference to process and ISO/IEC rules, which appear to have been either broken or seriously manipulated to achive the current result.
View in thread
0 Votes
+ -
It lies with the winner?
Henry Miller 4th Jun 2008
Microsoft didn't win--it did it's usual thing of lying and cheating to steal a result it couldn't earn. E.g.,

http://deepakphatak.blogspot.com/2008/05/this-is.html
0 Votes
+ -
Doesn't mater
superbus 4th Jun 2008
It doesn't matter what they did. They still won, OOXML is a standard, and the only thing anyone can do is keep forcing the issue so that Microsoft makes OOXML and ODF play nice.
0 Votes
+ -
how is OOXML a standard?
shis-ka-bob 4th Jun 2008
Please show me the OOXML standard. It (the specifications) hasn't been shared with the public. It isn't implemented in in any shipping products, even MS Office. MS announced that they will support ODF 1.1 before they will support OOXML. So, we have a ISO approved 'standard' that nobody can review, so this isn't useful as a de jure standard. It isn't implemented by anyone so it isn't a de facto standard. It is merely a pyrrhic victory.
0 Votes
+ -
I second that
Deefburger 6th Jun 2008
What Standard? What is the point? With nobody using it, nobody shipping it, and nobody needing it, what the heck is this about?

Are future versions of MSoffice going to to use it by default? So What? They don't use it now. They ship with the Non-ISO version. And the users are switching Office Defaults to the old DOC and XLS "Standards" so they can work with other offices.

OOXML is DOA. A pointless exercize in pirating market share away from legitimate standards and established defacto standards.
0 Votes
+ -
If Microsoft wants its ISO victory to count for anything..
DanaBlankenhorn 4th Jun 2008
It has to respect the idea of open standards, and open OOXML. If it fails to do this, its victory will be meaningless.

Whether it cheated along the way is not at issue. The question is what will Microsoft do to win Deepak Phatak's business, if anything, and that of millions of others who, like him, remain suspicious of Microsoft's motives.

If they do nothing they won nothing.
0 Votes
+ -
Whether it cheated along the way is not at issue.
tracy anne 8th Jun 2008
Actually it is, that is the point of the EU investigation to the ISO process on accepting OOXML, it is also the point of the objections, which also are about the process.

The entire process, of accepting OOXML, seems seriously flawed, with numerous reported irregularities. Each of the appeals are with reference to process and ISO/IEC rules, which appear to have been either broken or seriously manipulated to achive the current result.
0 Votes
+ -
Like the members of ODF Alliance India?
AllKnowingAllSeeing 4th Jun 2008
Sorry, but why would someone who is a memeber of the opposing document format vote honestly?

As allways, people are willing to slam MS while turning a blind eye to their side pulling the same crap.
0 Votes
+ -
So?
zkiwi 4th Jun 2008
As in at worst, does one wrong (India) make another wrong (Microsoft) right?

Next you'll be saying that [insert non-windows OS name here] problems make Windows problems disappear.
0 Votes
+ -
FUD.
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 4th Jun 2008
You have not read or followed India's decision. It is all based on fact, their extensive list of comments and concerns caused it to vote No originally and continue to do so at the DRM DESPITE intense lobbying and complaints to those in power that it was unfair to vote no just because of a few issues.

Venequela, Brazil, they have already gone heavily open source, that may have swayed their opinion, but everything I have read about India's decision was technical and fair and completely out there for everyone to see/read/know why it felt OOXML is not ready to be called a standard.

Now, on the pro-OOXML side, why is it that all the new "P" members can't be bothered to comment or work or even abstain from new votes? They have already stalled several standards and deadlocked ISO. If that doesn't deserve some criticism, what does?

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
Yes, but Pliny, like ALL MicroShaft Bigots, MUST PROTECT M$!!!!!
drprodny 4th Jun 2008
At ALL COSTS!

Damn you OSS and Apple Commierat Islamosymp Libburuls, anyway! We're MicroShaft Ammurika! We're Number One!

We're NUMBER ONE!

WE'RE NUMBER ONE!

::throws chair at people in moment of Ballmerian ecstasy!::
0 Votes
+ -
Please be more specific
masonwheeler 4th Jun 2008
What "same crap" that ODF Alliance India has done are you referring to? Please either give examples to back up your allegations or take your FUD elsewhere.
0 Votes
+ -
Would you care to elaborate on that?
balaknair 4th Jun 2008
"Sorry, but why would someone who is a memeber of the opposing document format vote honestly?"
A member of the opposing document format? The committee was composed of prominent IT experts who have no corporate interests. The OOXML vote was decided not based on political or commercial interests, but TECHNICAL merit. It's all documented and available for public perusal
http://www.bis.org.in/oxml/ooxml.htm
All you have done on the other hand is cast aspersions on the honesty of the panel members with absolutely nothing to back up your statements, just as MS did. In other words, an ad hominem argument.
If you had even bothered to do some background reading in this matter you would have seen that the Indian committee had spent a lot of time and effort in going through the proposed specification and had identified the shortcomings which had to be overcome for it to fulfill the requirements to be an open standard. MS chose to ignore much of these recommendations and then tried going behind the committee's back and approached the ministry of commerce. When the administration refused to believe that the committee did not have India's best interests at heart(and MS did!?) they went to the political leadership(who again failed to see that MSFT knew what was best for India and her people).
Is MSFT really so naive to believe that India would give up its sovereignty and act against its own interests just because a big corporation said so. The last time such a big corporation came along and hoodwinked the Indians, the result was two hundred years of colonization and exploitation. The East India Company might have pulled it off back then, but I can hope that Indians have come a long way since then, and will not let the wool be pulled over their eyes as easily.
0 Votes
+ -
Who cares how anybody voted?
Deefburger 6th Jun 2008
MS doesn't even implement their own standard!!!! It's a lot of hoopla over something NOBODY uses ANYWHERE!
0 Votes
+ -
My sentiments, exactly, but........
Ole Man 7th Jun 2008
Think like a sneak here, for a moment. Since Microsoft now (thinks) they OWN the STANDARD, they can adopt ODF (which they have already announced they will, sorta makes anyone with a brain wonder why they didn't do that to begin with, eh?), so now they can SELL ODF, a free document format.

And these clowns applaud Microsoft and think that ODF is now wonderful because they have the OPPORTUNITY to PAY Microsoft, but it was worthless whenever they could get it for free.

No wonder the world is in such a mess, eh?
0 Votes
+ -
What ODF Alliance India?
TtfnJohn 8th Jun 2008
As the people that have been accused of belonging to said organization have pointed out it seems to be an invention, out of whole cloth, by Micosoft.

Silly question, I know, but why would they vote any more dishonestly (or honestly) than bought and paid for Microsoft corporate fanboys in India? Or Brazil, or Venezuela or Denmark?

Another MS fanboy/astroturfer post, I'm afraid.

ttfn

John
0 Votes
+ -
Not a standard, yet
rpmyers1 4th Jun 2008
With the appeals and the lack of publishing, it's still not a standard.
0 Votes
+ -
OOXML is largely irrelevant and will "die"
TripleII-21189418044173169409978279405827 4th Jun 2008
ISO will waste time and money over the next couple of years doing "maintenance", however, the writing is on the wall. Who can be compliant? Add in the delays now for the appeals process, maintenance, then coding time to become even remotely compliant, you are looking at 3 years.

That's too long. ODF is a standard now, and in 3 years will be the de-facto public standard for documents. With 10+ vendors, and what will be a continual adoption of ODF by more countries, goverments, organizations, it will simply be too late to swap it out, even if OOXML becomes standard like.

MS was hoping for the rubber stamp ECMA gave to be duplicated by ISO so that they could be compliant now. It didn't happen, OOXML will undergo radical change, so MS did what it had to do to preserver it's 85% marketshare, adopt an open standard to prevent any more defections for this reason.

.doc and .xls will continue (with gradual migration away from) to be the dominant de-facto standard, ODF is now the only Open Standard, so no matter what ISO does with OOXML, it will be one of many standards that never sees widespread adoption.

http://blogs.eweek.com/brooks/content/office/microsoft_ooxml_dead_format_walking.html
Microsoft OOXML: Dead Format Walking
Since most Office users would be happy to continue using Microsoft's old binary formats, and since those for whom open standards are important would probably prefer ODF or PDF formats anyhow, I won't be surprised if OOXML quietly dies before that future Office iteration ever sees the light of day.

TripleII
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft OOXML opponents won't back down
bill_stanley@... 4th Jun 2008
Microsoft is Microsoft. They are om-nip-ee-tant
0 Votes
+ -
Funny that...
Spiritusindomit@... 4th Jun 2008
The crazy fanatical people lost in both cases.
0 Votes
+ -
What "closed binary objects?"
orcmid 4th Jun 2008
Do you mean the OLE objects that Microsoft puts in OOXML (in compliance with the specification) and describes as MIME type
application/vnd.openxmlformats-officedocument.oleObject?

Or do you mean the OLE objects that OpenOffice.org puts into ODF (in compliance with the specification) and describes as MIME type
application/vnd.sun.star.oleobject?

And which convert in both directions (via Office binary formats as intermediaries when OO.o is not using OOXML converters).

If this is what you have in mind, I am pretty confident that neither Microsoft Office nor OpenOffice.org are going to give up the ability to embed OLE objects in the near future.

Now, how this could be defined better and made more agreeable in a document-interoperability setting is an important challenge and something that the OOXML and ODF teams could work on via the ISO Harmonization effort and by simple interim agreements.

Meanwhile, it seems that Microsoft Office and OpenOffice.org are working with this just fine.
0 Votes
+ -
The objections
tracy anne 4th Jun 2008
go to process, and the rules. It's probably irrelevant whether Microsoft offers concessions or not. The fact of the matter is an immature specification was pushed through on a fast track process, with insufficient discussion. The specification needs to be handed back and worked through the normal process. The fast track process is supposed to be for mature specifications.
0 Votes
+ -
Just wait the end of the EC investigation
miso3 5th Jun 2008
Whether Microsoft did or didn't cheat along the way is at issue.

The EC is investigating the certification process. The outcome could be disastrous for both Microsoft and the ISO.

Of course, if ISO declares that the certification process failed, then there will be no more cas for an investigation.
0 Votes
+ -
I love the spin this give it : Microsoft OOXML opponents won't back down
tracy anne 7th Jun 2008
nt
0 Votes
+ -
RE: Microsoft OOXML opponents won't back down
wanderson 8th Jun 2008
This article by Dana Blankenhorn & Paula Rooney demonstrates the ignorance and arrogance of many American "tech" journalists, as well as their complete lack of understanding of many processes, particularly those in other continents/countries.

Unless the two have detailed technical background supporting notion that the appeals by several countries - which are falsely stated as "ODF supporters" - cannot be upheld, then I suggest they stick with other areas more familiar to them on "Microsoft home turf".

I had good fortune of conversing with a senior Indian government official very close to the ISO committee, that confirmed India's grave concerns about subversion of the legal processes and complete failure of adhering to the technical review procedure "required" by ISO policies and regulations. The objection and subsequent appeal by India (and other countries) had nothing what-so-ever to do with ODF.

The blatant (and illegal) interference by USA State Department officials into the European Union Anti-trust action against Microsoft, together with empty (non-factual based) partisanship to Microsoft by such writing as this proves that rabid, hateful Americanism is strong and quite unpalatable.

Join the conversation!

Formatting +
BB Codes - Note: HTML is not supported in forums
  • [b] Bold [/b]
  • [i] Italic [/i]
  • [u] Underline [/u]
  • [s] Strikethrough [/s]
  • [q] "Quote" [/q]
  • [ol][*] 1. Ordered List [/ol]
  • [ul][*] · Unordered List [/ul]
  • [pre] Preformat [/pre]
  • [quote] "Blockquote" [/quote]
ie8 fix

The best of ZDNet, delivered

ZDNet Newsletters

Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox

Facebook Activity

Blog Roll

Blog Archive

White Papers, Webcasts, & Resources
ie8 fix