Slashdot Mirror

I doubt Microsoft would choose to use anything with 'Open' in the title.

Sure they would.

You don't *need* a "platform dependent" API.
Go go http://openxmldeveloper.org/, and you'll find dozens of Java sample code examples for manipulating OOXML documents.

This .NET based API just makes it all the easier for those that are .NET programmers. Yeah, I know most slashdotters think that .NET is utter crap and therefore any .NET library is useless, but slashdotters aren't the target for this API.

There's nothing preventing slashdotters from making their own OOXML API, or even an ODF API if they want a "platform independent" API.

" It is already clear (from other /. stories) that the OOXML architecture seems rather shoddy and looks like something that was quickly put together. MSFT is trying to force it through iso rather thanb let OOXML succeed through its own merit... that alone draws suspicion to the quality of OOXML."

Oh please.
Rather than relying on FUD spread by /. and Rob Weird, why don't you read the spec yourself, or just go to http://openxmldeveloper.org/ and read some sample code and articles, and then decide if it's a "shoddy" architecture. And it wasn't quickly put together, it was put together over a number of years, and the ECMA process itself took over a year.

"ooxml is not a documented and freely implementable standard. your argumentation is therefore in all cases false."

It's documented right here: http://www.ecma-international.org/publications/sta ndards/Ecma-376.htm
And it's freely implementable. Hell, there numerous pieces of sample code at http://openxmldeveloper.org/ showing how to read, write, and manipulate OOXML files.

Try coming up with arguments that aren't so readily disproved next time. You guys make this too damn easy.

At http://openxmldeveloper.org/ there are already numerous Java samples on manipulating OOXML files.

So, although both ODF and Open XML are document formats, they are designed to address different needs in the marketplace.

Sure, Open XML was designed to address the need for Microsoft to maintain control over desktop office suites, while ODF was actually designed to be an open standard.

No, really, WTF is this supposed to mean? Would Microsoft mind pointing out some part of ODF that's insufficient? Better yet, offer a suggestion as to how to improve it -- they were, after all, part of OASIS for awhile...

When ODF was under consideration, Microsoft made no effort to slow down the process because we recognized customers' interest in the standardization of document formats.

Anyone who's been on Slashdot for awhile should remember how much lobbying Microsoft did to try to prevent ODF from taking root in Massachusetts. So, technically, Microsoft didn't try to slow down the standardization process, they merely tried to slow down the implementation process.

See OpenXMLDeveloper.org for an indication of some of the support for Open XML...

Yeah, note the copyright notice at the bottom of the page. Astroturf, anyone?

And from Ars Technica...

However, as Open XML had to support all the features of Office 2007, a large size was inevitable.

And ODF has to support all the features of:

• OpenOffice
• Star Office
• Google Docs & Spreadsheets
• KOffice
• Scribus
• Abiword
• ajaxWrite
• Zoho Writer
• Ichitaro
• IBM's Lotus/Domino
• IBM Workplace
• Mobile Office
• Gnumeric
• Neo Office
• Hancom Office
• WordPerfect???

(ripped off directly from a post by this comment.)

So there you go. I suppose it's possible Word 2007 could have more features than ALL of those, but somehow, I doubt it. The spec isn't bloated because Word is so great, the spec is bloated because Microsoft is afraid of interoperability.

Claims that the spec is impossible for third-parties to support have so far proven groundless

The fact is not that it's impossible -- it could be done, if you want to reverse engineer about five or six generations of Word. It would be difficult, but not impossible, to support enough of the standard to be liveable -- after all, we've done that with the binary Office formats for years.

No, the problem is that it's prohibitively, deliberately difficult for third-parties to implement perfectly, since it references specific quirks on specific versions of Microsoft's products, and the products of others, and doesn't even try to explain what those quirks are, only that you should support them properly. I would say that Microsoft is being deliberately unhelpful here.

If you're going to make it 6000 pages and unhelpful, why not make it 12000 pages, but actually spell out what we're supposed to do? At least then, we could not only duplicate the features in ODF, but we could do them better, the way they were meant to be done. For example: Instead of saying "Emulate Word 95 Full-Width Character Spacing", Microsoft could actually specify how Word 95 implements full-width character spacing. Then, we'd implement specifications that allow the implementation of any kind of spacing you want.

Let me put it this way: In HTML, we could've had, for example: <slashdot-link story_id="07/02/16/1334234" />. That would've been pretty damned convenient for the Slashdot people, but annoying for everyone else, who would have to go to Slashdot to find out how they did it, and in any case, it's much more limited than our current <a href> style which lets you actually link to anywhere. Standards are not about coddling sp

...go over to http://openxmldeveloper.org/default.aspx and fill up their forums with lots of direct questions about how to implement the OpenXML "standard"?

Tell them you're developing a cross-platform application with Linux and OS X versions, I'm sure they'll love that.

Actually you two are both wrong. The current (2007) version of the office file formats are fully documented on the ECMA site, not MSDN (though MSDN does also have some docs on the file formats as well). In fact, it is actually the file formats and not just API documentation that you will find at ECMA.

Office 2007 File Format Specs:
http://www.ecma-international.org/memento/TC45-M.h tm

Listing of MSDN Articles on working with the Office 2K7 Formats:
http://openxmldeveloper.org/archive/2006/08/31/599 .aspx

"Microsoft did not want to cede control of one iota of their Office franchise and they preferred to be able to hold the reins on just what software would be able to read a Microsoft Office document."

Is that why Office 2007's default formats will be open standards, recognized by ECMA, and later ISO?
Is that why the OpenXML developer's group already provides Java sample code that manipulates that file format without any need for Office 2007 being used?
Is that why a Novel dev is already working on a spreadsheet that uses that file format?

Read the following sites for enlightenment. :-)
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/default.aspx
http://openxmldeveloper.org/default.aspx

Better links regarding Open XML (the default format for Office 2007, which is going through ECMA standarization process as we speak):
http://blogs.msdn.com/brian_jones/default.aspx
The 2006-05-04 entry provides the most recent update on the ECMA standarization process, including revised spec, and notes on a Novell dev working on an open source spread sheet that can read/write Open XML format (so there is no "lock in").

http://openxmldeveloper.org/default.aspx
The home page of the OpenXML group that's pushing this format through the standardization process. Includes Java sample code that manipulates OpenXML documents, again demonstrating that there is no "lock-in").

If you're really interested, then view the Office 2007 videos at http://channel9.msdn.com/ and read the Office 2007 blogs. The sites I frequently read are:
Channel 9 (the Office 2007 videos are great)
Office 2007 Blog concerning the new UI
Office 2007 blog concerning new default file format (OpenXML)
OpenXMLDeveloper.org, the site of the group pushing OpenXML as an EMCA/ISO standard This group contains MS, Apple, Intel, researchers, businesses, some gov entities, etc). The site already has Java code samples showing how to manipulate OpenXML documents without requiring any MS Office software.
Excel blog Excel has a lot of good stuff, like multithreaded calculations for machines with multiple processors or cores, many business logic enhancements, exponentially larger spreadsheet capacity, Excel server, etc.

I don't really read the blogs on Word, PowerPoint, Access, Outlook, SharePoint, OneNote, etc, but there are links to those blogs in the Office UI blog cited above.

There's also a great video demo'ing features of Office 2007 at the March 21 2006 Office Dev Conference

Dismiss the other replies to your post saying that Office 2007 formats are "XML but not standard", as they post out of willfull ignorance. :-)

Office 2007 formats (aka OpenXML) are not the same as Office 2003 XML (which weren't standards recognized by an independent body). OpenXML is open and is going through the ECMA process right now.

http://openxmldeveloper.org/default.aspx is the home page of the organization pushing the standard. The founding members of this organization (shown here http://openxmldeveloper.org/archive/2006/03/18/Ope nXmlDeveloperGroup.aspx) include Microsoft (of course), Apple, Intel, other tech companies, businesses, some government entities, libraries, researchers). OpenXML is the default format for Office 2007, but you do not need Office 2007 to read, write, manipulate documents stored as OpenXML, in fact the site that I cite has examples of Java code tht manipulates the formats.

Microsoft is betting that they can compete on features rather than document format "lock-in", which many here have preached is the only reason for MS Office's dominance.

Dismiss the other replies to your post saying that Office 2007 formats are "XML but not standard", as they post out of willfull ignorance. :-)

Office 2007 formats (aka OpenXML) are not the same as Office 2003 XML (which weren't standards recognized by an independent body). OpenXML is open and is going through the ECMA process right now.

http://openxmldeveloper.org/default.aspx is the home page of the organization pushing the standard. The founding members of this organization (shown here http://openxmldeveloper.org/archive/2006/03/18/Ope nXmlDeveloperGroup.aspx) include Microsoft (of course), Apple, Intel, other tech companies, businesses, some government entities, libraries, researchers). OpenXML is the default format for Office 2007, but you do not need Office 2007 to read, write, manipulate documents stored as OpenXML, in fact the site that I cite has examples of Java code tht manipulates the formats.

Microsoft is betting that they can compete on features rather than document format "lock-in", which many here have preached is the only reason for MS Office's dominance.

While that is possible, I haven't seen anything like it in the file format so far. You can see samples and the draft spec on the OpenXML website. From what I've seen, it should at least be easier to interoperate with Office12 XML than with the old binary formats. Not that that is saying all that much, of course.