dennis@home wrote:
>
>
> "Josef Moellers" <josef.moellers@fujitsu-siemens.com> wrote in message
> news:ft212q$v59$1@nntp.fujitsu-siemens.com...
>> MS has a long track record of having to invent new formats for their
>> files: audio formats (WMA) and video formats (WMV) spring to my mind.
>> And all these formats are kept secret, so interoperability is impossible.
>> Since Office is their bread-and-butter product (afaik, most of their
>> revenue comes from Office), there is concern that OOXML will follow in
>> their tracks.
>
> They would not be standards compliant then and people would start to
> question the product.
How will they know?
1. If some MS office product can read whatever a MS office product has
produced, calling it an OOXML file but not being standards-conforming,
no-one will not notice.
2. As I read the complaints published and referenced on groklaw, the
OOXML standard is riddled with captchas that will prevent anyone else,
especially FOSS, to implement OOXML.
One of the big problems MS was facing was that government procurement
rules often require accepted standards, if they exist. So, as ODF had
been accepted as a standard, MS was under pressure to have OOXML
accepted as well.
As OOXML is an ISO and ECMA and whatnot standard, they can now tender
for government contracts. No-one will notice any deviations from the
standard, not only since no-one will be able to pinpoint in the 6000+
pages of "standards document" where a given document is not conforming
and because no other OOXML implementation can safely and legally exist.
>>>> but had to force yet another standard (OOXML) which will continue to
>>>> make documents unaccessible to those *not* using their programs?
>>>> Most likely, OOXML will become the default file format when storing
>>>> office documents and most likeley people will just click "Save"
>>>> rather than first select a different format.
>>>
>>> But as the OOXML format is an iso standard anyone can read or write
>>> it. If other developers don't support it then blame them. All the
>>> other formats have been published too.
>>
>> This appears not to be true.
>> Apparently having a file format accepted as a standard does not mean
>> that everyone is free to use it, most of all to create files using it.
>> For one, Microsoft has chosen to specify MP3 as *the* audio format
>> within documents, and the MP3 format is still covered by patents
>> (http://www.groklaw.net/article.php?story=20080310153345250).
>
> That hasn't stopped OSS using mp3, so I don't suppose it will stop OO
> using OOXML.
AFAIK, you may be legally entitled to decode MP3, but you cannot legally
create MP3. Having lame does not mean it's legal.
MP3 does have patent issues, so legally creating OOXML files which
contain audio is impossible. But implementing the *full* OOXML standard
will, most certainly, be required for some instances.
You cannot use some grey-area software in government locations.
--
These are my personal views and not those of Fujitsu Siemens Computers!
Josef Möllers (Pinguinpfleger bei FSC)
If failure had no penalty success would not be a prize (T. Pratchett)
Company Details:
http://www.fujitsu-siemens.com/imprint.html