Slashdot Mirror
Massachusetts Finalizes OpenDocument Standard Plan
wellington map writes "The state of Massachusetts has finalized a proposed move to an open, nonproprietary format for office documents, a plan that involves phasing out versions of Microsoft's Office productivity suite deployed in the state's executive branch agencies. Massachusetts expects its agencies to develop phased migration plans away from productivity suites that do not support OpenDocument, with a target implementation date of January 1, 2007. Looks like it's finally cemented after some heated discussions."
It's not actually a budget thing (though lord knows MA needs to do something about it's spending). It's about "sovereignty" and the availability of documents long after archive and to the general public.
i .pl?OpenFormatMeetingSept2005
You can listen to a recent meeting of the Mass Technology Leadership Council here:
http://www.softwaregarden.com/cgi-bin/oss-sig/wik
It's long, but they say time and time again they're only concerned with the document format and it's "openness." And they do a *great* job of shooting down Microsoft on this point.
"Ignorance more frequently begets confidence than does knowledge"
- Charles Darwin
Opendocument is a format backed from OASIS (Organization for the Advancement of Structured Information Standards), previously named SGML Group. It's not of Microsoft and it can be viewed as an open alternative to propietary MS Office format. Openoffice 2 implements this format as it's default format. Microsoft have no ownership on OpenDocument and it's wary that its widespread use will downplay the need to use MS Office and open the door to alternative packages, usually open source.
Note: while MS Office documents can be open in abiword and openoffice, it's kind of a closed format that can never be 100 percent documented, so compability can't be perfect. Only MS Office use fully the format so there's a dependency on Microsoft by using its format.
"I think this line is mostly filler"
> I understand that in the union, the Federal government can overrule
> a state's authority.
You do not understand correctly.
> By the way, what will happen when the Federal government sends
> documents to Massachusetts in word format? Would the state send
> them back?
The state will read them with OpenOffice, of course. What do you think?
> Suppose M$ suddenly decides to support OpenDocument, gets the
> state's business and then issues a "security patch", that
> introduces proprietary extensions as has been in the past?
Either the "extensions" will be turned off or Microsoft will lose the state's business again, and perhaps find itself in court for breach of contract.
Warning: this article may contain humor, sarcasm, parody, and perhaps even irony. Read at your own risk.
I, and anyone else who have creating word documents for the past decade or so, know how fustrating it is to go back and try to edit old work. Now, if one is using word as a toy, i.e. school papers or memos that no one really reads, then it doesn't matter how the work is saved, because the computer is just a fnacy typewriter, and no one will care about the document the day after tommorow. But when using Word to edit documents that will need to be revised for years to come, or that others will have to interact with, it is really a waste of time to have to fight to read in those docs when MS chooses to change the formats.
And it really is between MS closed format and something not so insane. The current state of the world is that most things are in MS format, and MS format is really a problem. I like MS Word 97, so, until a few years ago, that is what I used. I could use the latest version, as it would cost me very little to upgrade, but the money would buy me nothing but file compatibility with other users. The biggest prolem with word '97 is that the current MS word has difficulty reading the files. So I can upgrade to the current format, or I can find another solution. It shouldn't be hard for MS to provide the solution, as it is a MS product, in the form of backwards compatibility, but the choose not to. MS instead chooses to screw it's customers. Like 10 years ago when i had to reinstall and mess with filter to get the then current version of word to read files that were a year old.
Which is really what I think this is about. It is not so much that we want an open format. Many are happy using PDF files because PDF files have seldom let us down. What we don't want is a format that is so insanely closed that not even the company that controls it can keep up with from version to version. Everyone hates insecurity, and what MS has shown us since MS Word the first is that we cannot count on the security of reading our old files. This is why I use OO.org, and why it is not worth it to save anything important in any MS format.
At this point people usually reply that I am lying. But I was perfectly happy with MS Word until i woke up one morning and realized that nothing was going to change and i was putting all my writing in a black hole. MS Office is good, it is not overpriced, but in terms of file security, it is a very bad value.
"She's a scientist and a lesbian. She's not going to let it slide." Orphan Black
This sounds very similar to what Microsoft is doing with HTML/CSS/JS. Before they release a new browser, they state how CSS2 is "flawed," and therefore we wont support it (And I'm betting that they will add propritary functions that do a similar thing). The same thing happened with the half-assed support of pretty much any standards in HTML/JS...yes, they might have one or two parts that follow standards, but the rest is either proprietary, or a horrible "improved" take on the standards.
I'm sure MS will attempt to do the same thing to ODT files. They will make some fairly basic functions in Office stored in a "enhanced" form, which, ofcourse, only works in MS Office. Judging from past experiance, the "standard" files genorated by Office would be a horrible mash of invalid markup, useless elements, and namespaces that server no purpose; except to break compatibility with any other program. In their usual style, they will probally hide a series of options hidden under 12 dialog windows which are the only way to genorate an actual standard document. Not only this, those options would probally pop up a "scary sounding" warning when disabled, to stop the non-techies among us from changing them.
Just to back this up, look at the XML Word genorates for a document that only contains "Hello world!" (No, I'm not joking, check for yourself).
Today's Sesame Street was brought to you by the number e.
Last I checked (Oh, a couple of hours ago when I last ran it) OpenOffice.org comes with a spreadsheet. Also, I vaguely recall a presentation app called Impress, which can open PowerPoint presentations, and even a *gasp* database application called Base which can work much like Access, with forms, VB, and everything. OMG, amazing what you learn when you don't make up "facts" on the fly.
(I take it you've never checked out OOo 2.x yet. It's great. It comes with everything you need in an office suite except group email/scheduling, and I wouldn't be surprised if that's coming in 3.x)
Getting stuff free may be a major boon of Open Source, but it isn't the main goal. The main goal is freedom. And for your next question:
Which will I still be able to read in 50 years? Most certainly the latter, because the spec will always be here, and even if it isn't, we'll still have the source for the code which, although probably not as good as a real spec, could possibly be some sort of good documentation. Where's the open spec for Word Documents? Here's what I'd imagine for reading a modern Word Document in 50 years:
"You want to open a Word 2000 document? Sorry, support for that was removed in Word 2025. And good luck finding any emulator that can run any old versions of Word!"
Please, for the good of Humanity, vote Obama.