Slashdot Mirror
KOffice To Use Open Office File Format
InodoroPereyra writes "This article at
The Dot indicates that the KOffice
developers decided to switch to the Open Office file format (OASIS) for their next major release. Excellent news both for KOffice, which will benefit from OpenOffice's excellent filters, and for the GNU/Linux Desktop users in general, who will benefit from a unified file format standard between these office suites."
Let's wait how long it takes that other office suite vendor to see the light. After all, they are an OASIS member themselves...
Programming can be fun again. Film at 11.
This is very good news. Finally we have a choice between different word processors that use the same format. I think this can certainly help organizations in their decision to migrate or not to migrate to Linux. Let's hope this will be the new trend for the future.
-- Cheers!
One format to rule them all,
One format to find them,
One format to bring them all,
And in the saving lose all formatting.
He who laughs last is stuck in a time dilation bubble.
In other news, KOffice to use OpenOffice code base.
I guess we should be poking the Abiword developers now to do the same.
Using an XML based (and documented!) file format has additional advantages. First and foremost, the documents can be easily used by other applications, e.g. full text indexer. Generating meta data has never been easier ;)
... no problem. It's even possible to extract an abstract, collect hyperlinks from the document and present them seperately, leave out the graphics (or convert them)...
.doc? I'd guess so. As easy as with XML? Don't think so.
Or use a stylesheet on the document and adopt it for, say, mobile devices (my favourite topic, I must admit). XML->HTML, XML->WML, XML->cHTML
Is this possible with
My cats ate my karma. They also wrote this comment.
ASCII!
Does anyone know of a good ANSI editor for X?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
New app announded: KOffin.
Basically, that "other vendor" is facing irrelevancy. Especially looking at the proposed changes with DRM, server lock-in, a proprietary XML schema and the software as subscription model.
The OASIS format supported by Koffice, StarOffice, and OpenOffice.org is not only cheaper and more flexible, but safer in the long run because it's open. That means you're not locked into one platform, one vendor, or even on package. Though the differences are not so dramatic in a word processor, package independence means that individuals can choose the tool that works best for their needs or work methods and still collaborate.
Being an open format means you don't have to depend on the goodwill of a monopoly to keep your format alive. Nor is there a risk of breaking the DMCA, EEA, commit a computer related crime and violate several patents when you try to read that 5 year old file.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
Is this great new? How is this going to affect the end users. I guess it's because whenever someone mails me a .DOC file - I have to first open it in Openoffice. If it's a simple file - then I try opening it in KWord and save it to a PS file - so that I dont have to wait forever for it to open in Openoffice.
Gtg for my class - will continue this post later.
Nandz.
I suspect that it is also a big step closer to electronic documents with a long shelf life. This may lead towards electronic publishing where well-formed and, possibly, valid documents become the norm. Even if the structures are rudimentary, this still will help portability and retrieval.
Right now, [X]HTML and PDF are only part way there. PDF is useful for rapid dissemination, but can more or less be thought of as a compact form of paper. Most HTML document are neither well-formed nor valid and often too dependent on transient constellations of technologies. So, a format like this will let organizations choose tools suited for their specific needs and tasks.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
They will be using the OASIS file format, this doesn't mean they will be using the OOo MS import/export codebase. There MAY be a common library in the future, but that is not clear yet. Also, this is not for the coming release, but for the one after that (v2.0?) that is slated for say middle of next year.
I guess it's a great reason to celebrate...break out the champagne supernova! Call everyone using the unix server...use (Wonder) $wall
I'm glad we can all finally agree on one brow...um, file format.
Sorry, that's all the gallagher references I've got without smashing a watermelon.
Since OO decided to screw everyone and change formats between 1.0 and 1.1, does that mean now Koffice is also just like microsoft in abandoning people who've supported them in the past?
From my experience, OO's filters are decent, perhaps a little better than Microsoft's, but hardly anything to get excited about. The last time I read a Word file in OO, it screwed up a very simple bulleted list. Face it, it's very, very hard to write a really good word processor filter, especially for a file format as messy as Microsoft's.
The OO native file format is pretty good, or at least the current version is. I have some issues with it, like throwing in every obscure XML namespace that has some silly feature that somebody likes. And there's still too much device-specific information. But I guess you can always just ignore the noise, especially since it's more neatly separated out than in previous formats.
OK, I'm cynical about attempts to challenge Word's workplace dominance. But here's a scenario/fantasy that's worth thinking about: Bush II loses the '04 election, despite his carrier landing skills. An "anti-business" Attorney-General revives the anti-trust actions against Microsoft. This time, they ignore silly outdated rememdies like splitting off the application divisions (multiple monopolies, great) and come up with something that's ahead of the curve. Like forcing Redmond to work harder at standards compliance. Hey, you say Word dominates because it's better? Prove it: have it read and write OO format! Then you can compete on features, rather than locking out the competition with format crap.
I'm a hardcore VI(M) zealot. Any other ideas?
You can't judge a book by the way it wears its hair.
Not that it really matters, except that the A is ASCII is "American", so Western Europeans will accuse you of being U.S.-centric.
Despite the name, the "ANSI Character set" was never any kind of standard. Microsoft claims they call Microsoft Latin1 "ANSI" because it's based on an ANSI draft that eventually became ISO Latin1. But I think it has to do with the "ANSI" software that used to be in MS-DOS. This emulated an "ANSI Terminal" (better known as a DEC VT-100) and allowed the ANSI graphics BBS people used to be so fond of. Not the same character set as Latin1, of course, but it's not suprising that the tech writers would confuse the two.
Further confusion: when I was documenting Delphi, explaining the exact meaning of the AnsiString character type took some skill. Its characters were never any kind of "ANSI" character set. In fact, it's not even a single-byte character set. It is, in fact, UTF-8, which is also a superset of ASCII, but which uses multi-byte characters to represent the more exotic stuff.
Yet further confusion: Slashdot seems to use ISO Latin1, but sends an HTTP header claiming to use UTF-8! Doesn't matter most of the time...
I supposed the prohibition on product reviews and general criticism are contributing to the problem by preventing informed decisions. Likewise when the media refer to the Microsoft Worm / Virus of the Week as an "E-mail Worm" or "Internet Virus", they are effectively providing spin/damage control for a single company's design and production defects by neglecting the scope of the problem.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.
First, it seems that only two of the 6 flavors of MS-Word 2003 get the XML as touted. Second, the schema is still proprietary. Third, the application uses DRM so earlier versions are not compatible and must buy upgrades. Fourth, the DRM is dependent on MS-Server 2003 with expensive per-seat client licenses.
So, at first glance to use MS-Word 2003's XML format it looks like you need at least one installation of MS-Server 2003 plus client licenses. Then you will need new copies of Office 2003 accross the board. Then to be allowed the privilege of accessing your data, you must keep paying the licensing fees. That allows single point of failure to take down your whole workplace at either of two points: the server or the licensing fees.
Making tools that go around all that would be in violation of copyright/DMCA, the Economic Espionage Act of 1996, a computer crime, at the very least.
So at first glance, it looks safer, more flexible, and less work to go with the Oasis format.
Beta is broken and the link to classic doesn't work. Stop wasting our time or there won't be anybody left here.