Microsoft's OOXML Formulas Could Be Dangerous

hill101 writes "According to Rob Weir's blog, Microsoft's 325-page OOXML specification for spreadsheet formulas is deeply flawed. From basic trigonometric functions that forget to specify units, to statistical functions, to critical financial functions — the specification does not contain correct formulas that could possibly be implemented in an interoperable way. Quoting Mr. Weir: 'It has incorrect formulas that, if implemented according to the standard, may cause loss of life, property, and capital... Shame on all those who praised and continue to praise the OOXML formula specification without actually reading it.'"

Comments

News??

[kauttapiste]

Uh, oh. Microsoft's specification is flawed? To whom good sir is this news?

Slashdot's slogan "News for nerds" would imply that anything posted on Slashdot is 'news', which usually is characterised by 'information'. Shannon's information theory dictates that in order for something to contain information, the probability of you not knowing the value of the message being passed is high. The probability of MS's specification being flawed and dangerous: approaching 1. Ergo, this is not news!

Oh and don't get me even started on the "Stuff that matters" part here..

Re:Guess what?

[jkrise]

I'm sorry, Excel doesn't pander to high school students. In the real world, when the sine of an angle is mentioned, it is SUPPOSED to be radians. Every programming language I know accepts arguments for trig functions as radians.

Why is there a 'Student Edition' of MS Office at 80% discounts if MS doesn't pander to high school students?

Every high school I know teaches angles in degrees, not radians. When someone changes their stance completely, we say "It's a U turn or a 180-degree shift" Should we say 1.55 radians shift instead?

The default value for angles ought to be degrees, radians could be an option to cater to specific situations. Getting Microsoft to do normal things would mean a 180 degree shift in their philosophy, though.