Slashdot Mirror
OOXML Won't Get Fast-Track ISO Standardization
realdodgeman writes "The International Committee for Information Technology Standards (INCITS) recently held an internal poll to determine the position that the United States should take on Microsoft's request for Office Open XML (OOXML) approval. With eight votes in favor, seven against, and one abstention, the group was one vote short of the nine votes required for approving OOXLM ISO standardization. This will mean a huge slowdown to the standardization to the OOXML format. 'Given the controversial nature, relative complexity, and significant importance of the standard, the results of INCIT's vote is unsurprising. An INCITS technical committee also voted against fast-track OOXML approval last month prior to the executive board's vote. Further deliberation is clearly needed as well as further refinement of the format. It seems as though many of the organizations participating in the approval process are generally supportive of the standard itself, but are unwilling to voice unconditional support until their concerns are resolved. OOXML may be down, but it's certainly not out.'"
Way to sensationalize the title, Zonk. The organization which will form the official position of the US voted against approving the standard. That's quite a leap from saying "OOXML Won't Get Fast-Track ISO Standardization". Guess what the "I" in "ISO" stands for? (Although if MS can't even get the US to vote for them, it's hopefully doubtful that they'll get most other countries...)
It's actually "Office Open Extensible Markup Language".
"Our opponent is an alien starship packed with atomic bombs. We have a protractor."
"The entire standard in verbatim is 'Open Office Extensible Markup Language'."
It's not.
It's Office Open Extensible Markup Language.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Office_Open_XML
No lawsuit.
And besides, Open Office precedes OOXML by a few years. If anything, OpenOffice.org *might* have a complaint about Microsoft misappropriating and reversing their name.
--
BMO
Actually OOXML stands for Office Open XML which is really just short for Microsoft Office Open XML. This whole naming issue is really rather laughable being that OpenOffice.org has to include that .org in their name to avoid infringing on another existing trademark.
My canonical reference for these things is Andy Updegrove's blog (http://consortiuminfo.org/standardsblog/).
This decision was only for the U.S. and it's not over there. Look carefully at the comments by those who voted, and you'll see there is room for changes. Look at Lexmark's comment...
It's very important to understand that the OOXML fight is not over. Microsoft are doing a fantastic job of explaining to committees why this format deserves to be an international standard, and of ensuring no-one gets onto the committees who can raise this dreamy proposition.
We are looking at a lot of votes between now and end-August, across the world, and it's still not too late to submit comments to - for example - the Australian Standards Authority, which will almost certainly vote YES to OOXML.
On NoOOXML.org the FFII is coordinating the fight. If you've not signed the petition, please do so.
My blog
Yeah I just read here that Apple's iWork '08 supports OOXML very well, while MS is still struggling with their OOXML implementation in Office for the Mac. I can hardly believe that story; why would it be more difficult to implement OOXML on the Mac than on Windows? Does OOXML depend on some built-in properties of the Windows OS? If that is the case it will never be an open standard.
-- Cheers!
That's not what the PCWorld article says at all.
iWork '08 is claimed to be able to open but not write OOXML. In practice, it doesn't appear to do even that well. http://www.bioneural.net/2007/08/11/iwork-08-and-s upport-for-open-xml/
"I've got more toys than Teruhisa Kitahara."
Yes, one well-documented and full-featured autospace function is enough.
It's there because Microsoft does not want anyone to be able to do a full implementation. It's there because "OO"XML is not open standard.
Apple promised Microsoft that they would support MSOXML in the standards approval process, and that iWork would support MSOXML but NOT ODF. What does Apple get in return? Microsoft promises to build a Universal Binary version of Office that remains (mostly) compatible with the Windows versions.