While Microsoft professes enthusiasm for the pending acceptance of its Office Open XML Formats as a standard, there are plenty of skeptics who question exactly what they have in mind up in Redmond, Wash. as some critical elements are being withheld from the deal.

Alan Yates, who is general manager for Microsoft's Information Worker Strategy, says the pending approval "means customers and the industry are a major step forward toward preserved interoperability. We look forward to a continued open and productive process with Ecma and its members," writes Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols for eWeek. This may be premature, Vaughan-Nichols reminds his readers, as the approval is not yet in place, though few predict any serious impediments to its acceptance.

Expressing a somewhat more harsh view, Gartner analysts Michael Silver and Rita Knox suggest that the technology needed to make the formats useful simply are not open. "While it will be possible for OpenOffice.org and others to more faithfully replicate Microsoft's file format in their applications, Microsoft's rendering engine will not be an open specification. Thus, users of third-party products won't likely be able to display Microsoft's files with 100 percent visual fidelity or to execute macros (which will be saved in a different format) without problems," they say.

Even the very "openness" of the standard is at issue for some observers, notably Stephen O'Grady, principal analyst with RedMonk, who says, "I personally think Microsoft probably means for it to be open—recognizing that if they reneg on the implied agreement downstream they'll get crucified in the court of public opinion, if not actual courts."

Vaughan-Nichols reports that Will Rodger, director of public policy for Open Source and Industry Alliance (OSAIA), is more than a little concerned about Microsoft's control of this "open" standard. "The proposal falls short of what even pessimists expected. We thought we'd see at least a token surrendering of control in this document. Instead, we're told, Microsoft wants to retain all control in order to assure that this effort will be compatible with existing Microsoft documents before moving on to round two," Rodger remarked.

Rodger finds the question somewhat perplexing since, as he noted, "Developers around the world already spend incalculable hours trying to make their products work with Microsoft's precisely because Redmond refuses to open its formats to public scrutiny. There's no time left for delaying tactics such as these," he concluded.

Gartner's Silver and Knox see Microsoft's aim as directed at staving off the effort by OASIS to foster acceptance of the OpenDocument Format. Microsoft may be attempting to create the impression that it is more in favor of the acceptance of Office Open XML Formats as a standard than it is in truth. Slowing the process would give Microsoft more scope to deal with the move in states like Massachusetts, where open-standards are finding enthusiastic support.

Sun's Simon Phipps sees Microsoft's objective as forcing two "standards" on the public, only one of which will be genuinely open. "Microsoft has the opportunity to do the right thing and support OpenDocument. They missed," said Phipps.

Meanwhile, Vaughan-Nichols writes, IBM is announcing support for ODF in its products, specifically Version 2.6 of its Workplace Managed Client application, due out in early 2006. "The ODF standard is a key development in the management of corporate data and documents organizations should not have to pay to access their own data, and the ODF standard ensures that key information like financial records, government contracts, payroll data and other corporate information is usable and accessible, regardless of your software platform," said Bob Sutor, vice president of standards and open source at IBM, in a statement released by the company. [...read more...]

		fullsource
Print Email Current Profile Archive Blog Generate newsletter