Microsoft Word Document ML Schemas Published

Lars Munch writes "On Monday the 17th November the xml schemas for the Word Document ML along with documentation, was uploaded to the Infostructurebase (ISB). With the Word Document ML specification anybody can generate, view and process Microsoft word documents on any format." (Here are the legal terms under which the schemas can be used.) "The Word Document ML is based on the W3C specification eXtensible Markup Language (XML), there by providing documents that are easy to integrate into a large variety of systems. The Danish Government Infostructurebase is the first schema repository to make the schemas accessible to the public. The Microsoft Office Document ML schemas and documentation can now be downloaded from the ISB Repository." There are more links on this page.

Comments

Re:Not so fast

[Chokolad]

> Wait a second ... I think the XML-format document types are only available for corporate versions of MS office. If that is true there still will be a lot of propiertary binary-only .DOCuments around in the future.

You are wrong. Word Standard Edition can save into WordML (which schema has been published). Enterprise version allows you to map certain parts of documents into Xml with customer specified schema.

GPL does not require sublicensing

[David Jao]

GPL 7 requires the right to sublicence patent rights to the people who obtain a GPL program from you.

Not true. Section 7 of the GPL requires that patent rights be publicly available, but it does not require that you personally sublicense those patent rights.

Specifically, GPL section 7 says:

... if a patent license would not permit royalty-free redistribution of the Program by all those who receive copies directly or indirectly through you, then the only way you could satisfy both it and this License would be to refrain entirely from distribution of the Program.

Since the Microsoft patent license does permit royalty-free redistribution, it does not contradict the GPL in this regard (although it may have other incompatibilities; I have not looked at the whole thing thoroughly yet).

Re:Out-Open-Sourcing Open Source

[KagakuNinja]

Word will now allow anyone to create XML Schemas and "Solutions" (groups of schemae)...

Just thought you would like to know, the plural of schema is schemata.

Mr. Language Person

I call bullshit

[jrumney]

This schema is patented.

Microsoft knows full well that an XML schema cannot be patented. The patent nonsense is a way to scare off open source developers. They may hold patents on some algorithms they've used to implement this in MS Office, but we don't have to use those same algorithms to read those documents with an XML schema capable parser and do whatever we like with them.

Re:No. This is worse than before

[dabadab]

Don't forget that in the EU patents can not be abused in this, since the nice people from FFII and others got through an amendment that you are free to use patented technologies for interoperability - and I can't really imagine any other uses for a fileformat besides of interoperability.

Re:Out-Open-Sourcing Open Source

[superyooser]

Slight clarification: Only the Pro edition can create XML Office documents, but any edition of Office 2003 can read them.

Unfortunately, not bullshit

[ciaran_o_riordan]

First, remember that file formats in general are patentable. The ASF video format is one example.

Some might say: "But that's a binary format."

Doesn't matter. Microsofts Office-xml format has plenty of binary data. They uuencode it so that it's official XML, but it's still encrypted or command content, not cleartext.

What if Microsoft embedded an ASF video in the word format?
They'd have to uuencode it first, then stick it in. Would this suddenly make the ASF format non-patented? no. And once parts of a format are patented, you can't recreate the whole format without negotiating a patent deal with the holder.

Yes, the law is an ass. No, you can't circumvent it with clever words.

Re:Out-Open-Sourcing Open Source

[Pharmboy]

Now, with the opening of the format, that "mostly compatible" becomes "compatible."

Did any of you read the actual Microsoft patent statement? It says you must obtain a license if you USE the information in a seperate application for compatability. Quoting them:

"There is a separate patent license available to parties interested in implementing software programs that can read and write files that conform to the Specification."

Technically, anyone that looks at it, and uses it to put compatability for Open Office, are infringing on their patent. And now that the spec is in the open, its very easy for microsoft to say "we opened it up, and they infringed, this is why we dont like open source". This also means, that if you DON'T look at it, and instead do manage to reverse engineer it, it is likely that a judge will believe MS that you are lying and instead just read their "open" standard.

Its open, as long as you don't use it.