Slashdot Mirror
Interview with Sun's Florian Reuter
silentbob4 writes "Mad Penguin is running a series of three interviews with people in the trenches working to bring you OpenOffice.org 2.0. The first of these interviews, with Sun's Florian Reuter, covers some of the differences between the truly open XML found in OpenOffice.org 2.0, and the closed MS Word ML found in the upcoming Microsoft Office 12. He also discusses the importance of simple end users in the process of improving the code with bug reports."
OOo 2.0 is really different from Microsoft Office in a way that makes a difference. If MS comes up with same antics what would make it stand out. I've been saying it again and again. WebOffice will stand out and be adopted widely. (and quickly). Before the OOo2.0 is out we'll be ready for another revolution. So hurry Google with the WebOffice!
Scott McNealy to Michael: "Suck my Sun!" Michael Dell to Scott : "Lick my Dell!"
I only hope the new document format makes it easier for them (and third-party application) to convert an OOo document into readable HTML with style sheets. Whenever I write a documentation that is among others to be published on the web I am tempted to write it in OOo because I like it. I still end up writing it in HTML myself because I don't like OOo's HTML output.
On se Internetz nobody noes your German.
Genuine stupidity perhaps, but artificial intelligence???
Riiiiiiight.
No folly is more costly than the folly of intolerant idealism. - Winston Churchill
I think you are new to standards. Standards are rarely implemented the same way by everyone irregardless of how well defined it is. For example look at html/css etc. and browser support reminding yourself browsers are just catching up to 1997-8 standards.
I think there is a very good probability that MS XML document format will survive just as long as any open format, just be they are the de facto. And I should remind you that MS XML format would be considered an open format, if it were not for MS excluding redistribution of source code. It does not prevent people from using a different licence. (Other companies including apple have implemented it)
Maybe you should look at the new office format, all someone has to do is create an online service that can parse MS doc xml and convert to open office.org xml, and guess what that is the point of using xml. And you can get all the documentation you need from MS on how to parse MS doc XML to convert to your own, and we do it at work everyday, to export data from Office to DBs, web services etc. In this connected world, without redistributing, Google, Sun, or even openoffice.org can implement web services to convert that are not part of the source code being redistributed.
Essentially all I am pointing out is just because a license forbids source code distribution does not imply it not open. Open is a relative term. Opensource and royalty free are not.
You mean just like the MS Office reference schemas which include a Patent License that includes the term:
"You are not licensed to sublicense or transfer your rights."
This making it impossible to implement in Free and most Open Source software? Not very useful to OpenOffice.
I've written many apps that reads data from databases (SQL Server, MySQL, Oracle) and/or files (XML, CSV), opens Excel or Word or even Powerpoint and creates documents with nice charts and so on. I've done this using Microsoft Visual Studio 6, 2003 and 2005 but what I've heard, you don't have to use MS's IDEs or other tools for this. Office apps I used through COM-interface. In fact I've done some tools to convert stuff from Excel and Word to other formats throught those interfaces. I've written all these apps using C++, C# and VB.NET. Is there something similar in OpenOffice? Do I have to write XML files (and is there tools for this, or must I do it by hand) or can I use some decent API to create sheets?
You don't know what you don't know.
The enthusiastic rambling on "Web 2.0" in the opening paragraph is quite unrelated to OpenOffice, an old-fashioned stand-alone application. It's probably related to a mistake Florian Reuter makes throughout the interview. He speaks of "formulas" where he actually means "forms" - He's a native German speaker and mixes up the two words because the German word for "form" is "Formular".
gopher://cramer.plaintext.cc http://cramer.plaintext.cc:70
Note that there was nothing in that "clarification" indemnifying developers. By explicitly indemnifying users, they are leaving the option open to lock out competing developers if they change their minds in some time in the future.
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
The XML Schemas are freely downloadable, you don't have to sign anything. They are just patenting their own software implementation that processes those XML documents. You can still make your own implementaiton.
Ok, so you don't have to actually sign the patent license, but still the legal notice is provided within the downloadable MSI:
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. This patent license is available at this location: http://www.microsoft.com/mscorp/ip/format/xmlpaten tlicense.asp.
But let's look at the article you linked to:
The patent application states: "The present invention (word processing document stored in a single XML file) is directed at providing a word-processing document in a native XML file format that may be understood by an application that understands XML, or to enable another application or service to create a rich document in XML so that the word-processing application can open it as if it was one of its own documents."
Broad, non-specific. This could include any kind of use of the schemas.
Microsoft spokesman Mark Martin denied that the recently discovered patents contradict Microsoft's fall 2003 moves to open up its XML schemas. [...] Martin said it would not make sense for Microsoft to block or hamper XML development -- "something it has been working to establish as a standard and get broadly and consistently developed."
Embrace.
However, Microsoft will "innovate above the standard -- just as other companies will do in an effort to seek differentiation, address customer needs, add competitive value, etc.," he explained.
Extend. You know the next word.
This isn't the first time that Microsoft has sought patent protection for technologies that are W3C standards. For example, the Redmond software company was granted a patent for the W3C cascading-style-sheet technology in 1999.
No, and that pretty much pissed off everybody at W3C. They filed for the patent in secret while developing CSS with the other members of the W3C.
I'm not convinced by this article.
zWhat would an EWOULDBLOCK block, if an EWOULDBLOCK could block would? -- me
... I'd like to give an example. Everybody has filled out a form with a request for vacation holiday to submit to your boss. You have to fill out the starting date, the end date, how many days you want to be gone, and who is responsible when you are gone. You first have to get the form, you download it, you print it, you fill it out. Then you mail it or you get it to your boss in some other way. Then the request gets granted, then somebody has to maintain the data base of how many holidays you have left, and so forth. It is slow and inefficient.
:)
With web services and service-oriented architectures and X-forms, this process will be entirely different. You'll download the forms from your company's website, fill out the form, press submit button, the data will be sent to a web server which maintains the holidays left, and everything will get done automatically. It will tell you if you have enough days left, a notification will be sent to the person who has to approve the holiday application, and the whole process will be much smoother. This is how web flow will be done more and more over the next year or two. Having support for the end user this way will be a big deal, and will change how we think of collaboration with forms.
No offense to anyone involved here, but I worked at a company that was doing that over a year ago with Sharepoint/MSOffice. The backend technical details were probably slightly different than what they're talking about here, but lordy this is nothing revolutionary. The fact that OO is now offering a way to do it - maybe. The thing that bugs me is that reading things like this, I get the impression that people working on things like this (I don't mean vacation request systems, but many open source projects in general) is that features like this area touted out like they are something new or revolutionary. It indicates that they're probably not keeping up with with other vendors/platforms are doing. I wish I could put this in to words better, but I don't have any more time right now.
creation science book