Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

China's Open Document Format Fight

Posted by Zonk on from the open-docs-around-the-world dept.

eldavojohn writes "While there's been a lot of talk of the open document formats in the states, China is facing the same dilemma. A ZDNet blog examines the issue by pointing out they will most likely merge their current standard with either OOXML or ODF. The bulk of their post points out why OOXML shouldn't be ISO certified and is the biggest problem for Microsoft's standard: 'Another Standard, Microsoft does not support, is the specification RFC 3987, which defines UTF-8 capable Internet addresses. Consequently, OOXML does not support, to use Chinese characters within a Web address.' This would be problematic for many languages, not just Chinese."

10 of 118 comments (clear)

  1. Standards by jaavaaguru · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Another Standard, Microsoft does not support, is the specification RFC 3987, which defines UTF-8 capable Internet addresses


    This probably doesn't surprise many people here. Their mail client is also incapable of handling hyperlinks longer than around 78 characters, and their browser's not too great on the acid test.

    What Internet standards do they support properly?
    --
    Follow me
    1. Re:Standards by nevali · · Score: 2, Insightful

      E-mail gets wrapped--typically--by the receiving client. With format=flowed (which Outlook does support, kinda), it doesn't matter how long the lines you send are.

      78 characters is pretty much solely an issue with non-flowed plain-text e-mail, and the vast majority of clients out there send flowed mail by default (because it removes the hard limit altogether).

    2. Re:Standards by osu-neko · · Score: 3, Insightful

      Not to troll, but MySQL isn't the most diligent ANSI SQL follower either. If you're going to point fingers, make sure you're not in a pot/kettle scenario first.

      There exists an open-source application that doesn't follow a standard, therefore, Microsoft should not be criticized for not following the standard?

      Also, is the OP a MySQL developer? If not, he/she is neither the pot nor the kettle, but a third party fully justified in calling either one of them black.

      One assumes you are trolling, otherwise you're being rather stupid...

      --
      "Convictions are more dangerous enemies of truth than lies."
  2. Lazy implementation. by rizzo320 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Reading the analysis in the ZDNet Asia article, it's sounding more and more like Microsoft's OOXML was created for only two reasons. First, to quell the upsurge at the state government level the need for an "open document" format. Second, to force users into newer versions of Office that are compatible with the new "open standard". The standard Microsoft file formats (.doc, .xls, .ppt, etc) haven't major revisions in almost a decade. This allows users to continue using older versions of Office, rather then upgrade. Many of them have been reverse engineered for compatibility in non-Microsoft products. Remember, Microsoft has never profited with compatibility.

    If what the article is actually true, then, Microsoft might have a tough road ahead in the international community. Microsoft wants to control the format so they can lock-in the user. You can bet that even if this version of OOXML is certified, that, some revision or change down the road in another version of Office will break compatibility. Add in a lack of complete documentation (despite the 6000 pages already completed), and you have a recipe for continued vendor lock-in.

    I hope everyone sees through the Microsoft fog, and continues to develop the ODF format. If China decides to merge its format with ODF, its a step in the right direction.

    1. Re:Lazy implementation. by sunwukong · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The documentation is written in the same style and level of detail as this troll.

  3. February?!?!?!?!bruary by overshoot · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I realize that /. isn't intended for fast-breaking news, but TFM is from February and a Hell of a lot has happened since then.

    --
    Lacking <sarcasm> tags, /. substitutes moderation as "Troll."
  4. Re:Internet Addresses by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 1, Insightful

    There are domain names with non-roman character that are not phishing site.

  5. google CJKV by shis-ka-bob · · Score: 2, Insightful

    First, China is the most populous country in the world. Second, Japan, Korea and Vietnam also use Chinese characters.

    --
    Think global, act loco
  6. Re:You don't know how many times by mathfeel · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Chinese is just an example of non-Latin language. Even within Latin language, there are special accented character you can't use for URL...

    --
    The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the 'social sciences' is: some do, some don't
  7. Re:Cannot Merge With OOXML by Citizen+of+Earth · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Yeah, because everybody should stop at a tiny bit of analysis.

    Yes, let's torture a figure of speech. Deeper analysis will reveal that not only is it technically impossible, it is also practically impossible, so there will only ever be one implementation of MSOXML.

    analysis on ODF and decided it shouldn't be used because it doesn't define formulae at all

    It is quite easy to extend a standard to include new things, and ODF 1.1 is well under way. However, it is practically impossible to remove broken stuff from a standard, so we would be stuck with the MSOXML dog's breakfast until Microsoft abandons it in five years.

    Incidentally, are you implying that you prefer MSOXML over ODF? Wow!