Slashdot Mirror
ODF Threat to Microsoft in US Governments Grows
Tookis writes "Another setback for Microsoft has cropped up in the space of document formats in government organizations. The state of California has introduced a bill to make open document format (ODF) a mandatory requirement in the software used by state agencies. Similar legislation in Texas and Minnesota has added further to the pressure on Microsoft, which is pushing its own proprietary Office Open XML (OOXML) document format in the recently released Office 2007. The bill doesn't specify ODF by name, but instead requires the use of an open XML-based format."
I think that history will point to the Massachusetts move to require an open format as the watershed moment, where Microsoft's stranglehold on the industry began to falter. Because that poor IT director who lost his job in the noise and tumult pointed out to the world that the Emporor, indeed, was not wearing any clothes. Generations from now, ODF will most likely be the standard for public document archives, and the culture and technicalities of documents drawn from our generation will still be available, thanks to the guts and drive of a single man who (ironically) lost his job for accurately identifying one of the most significant problems of the decade.
I have no problem with your religion until you decide it's reason to deprive others of the truth.
According to Andy Upgrove, the Netherlands essentially were bought out by Microsoft like ANSI was. If Microsoft is successful in getting ISO approval, this California law will essentially get read in as a "Thou shalt use Microsoft Office" law.
While I hope ISO doesn't ratify OOXLM, the cynical side of me doesn't have a whole lot of hope.
Tyrrany! The government of California is mandating things to... the government of California. One can only weep for those agile, efficient state agencies, hamstrung in their efforts to serve the public by the state legislature's document format demands.
Seriously, California's government is supposed to let each of its agencies choose (or not choose) its own standard for documents, so that one part of the government can't communicate with another? Talk about mediocrity.
"The best we can hope for concerning the people at large is that they be properly armed." - Alexander Hamilton
Lie only ranted about the ridiculousness of going to the trouble to craft new standards, and then suggested that we instead repurpose a set of standards for web documents so that they work for exchanging documents intended for print. As somebody aware of what hell it's been dealing with web standards, your concern should be focusing not just how long it took for XHTML and CSS standards to be sort-of accepted, but how stupid it would be to go and extend something that people have been working hard to simplify.
c++;
Theoretically the standard does have input from multiple parties. The ECMA process had 21 voting parties (20 voted in favour, IBM voted against). That was a process where more than one person had input. The current ISO process has fourteen different countries submitting contradictions. You and I both know that input is useless if it doesn't cause a change, but all it takes is one change in the standard to answer those contradictions for Microsoft to be able to claim that changes were made based on outside input. I guess it depends on the legal definition of "input" that the law has. I haven't read the law, so I don't know.
As far as multiple implementations... Corel has already announced support for OOXML in Word Perfect. Novel has announced an OOXML filter for OpenOffice.org suite. Lovely how Novel's little deal is more and more of a stab in the back.