Slashdot Mirror


New York Decision On ODF Vs. OOXML Approaching

christian.einfeldt writes "In August of 2007, the State of New York passed legislation requiring its CIO, Melodie Mayberry-Stewart, to gather information on the advantages and disadvantages of adopting either ODF or OOXML as a document standard, and to report her findings by 15 January 2008. As part of her duties under that legislation, the CIO issued a Request For Public Comment to get feedback on the topic. The deadline for that public comment is 28 December 2007 — so there is still time for the Slashdot crowd to be heard."

37 of 160 comments (clear)

  1. anybody? by pak9rabid · · Score: 3, Funny

    Am I the only one surprised that this was actually posted here before the deadline?

  2. Write! by h4rm0ny · · Score: 5, Interesting


    If you don't do something as quick and simple as writing to ask for something, what right do you have to complain when you don't get it. If just a small fraction of the people here write in support of ODF, that will be a huge and impressive response.

    There's enough complaining about OOXML et al on this site. Put your money where you mouth is.

    --

    Aide-toi, le Ciel t'aidera - Jeanne D'Arc.
    1. Re:Write! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
      what right do you have to complain when you don't get it

      Let's see - the NY taxpayers are already paying this CIO's (probably hefty) salary, and she is supposed to recommend that which is best for her constituents.

      From all the info I've seen regarding the matter, ODF and OOXML are two document standards. One was written by committee and has the support of multiple companies, organizations, and individuals. The other is written by a monopoly and has support of no one except MS and their paid shills.

      The fact is there is absolutely no reason for a government body to go with MS's lock-in format considering the technical merits of both, and most especially the past behavior of MS. OOXML is a pseudo-standard, purposefully obfuscated to keep the MS monopoly gravy-train running smoothly.

      If these government agencies can't start making no-brainer decisions in the interest of their constituents, perhaps it's time that these positions were simply abolished...

    2. Re:Write! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Informative

      The following are the minimal characteristics that a specification and its attendant documents must have in order to be considered an open standard:
              * The standard is adopted and will be maintained by a not-for-profit organization, and its ongoing development occurs on the basis of an open decision-making procedure available to all interested parties (consensus or majority decision etc.).
              * The standard has been published and the standard specification document is available either freely or at a nominal charge. It must be permissible to all to copy, distribute and use it for no fee or at a nominal fee.
              * The intellectual property - i.e. patents possibly present - of (parts of) the standard is made irrevocably available on a royalty-free basis.
              * There are no constraints on the re-use of the standard.

      These commonly accepted criteria are enough to ignore the whole OOXML vs ODF discussions as OOXML patent licesing conditions only fake compliance. No one trusts the OSP and the CNS from Microsoft. And openness of the ongoing ISO process is a running gag.

    3. Re:Write! by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Funny

      Any suggestions for how to phrase it if you're not a New York resident?

      How about this?

      Dear CIO;

      I'm not from New York, but I'm on the Internet. The same Internet that thinks Ron Paul, lolcats, and "2 girls 1 cup" are great, so I obviously know more than anyone technical.

      I don't know anything about your actual requirements, but you should pick ODF, because OOXML is from Microsoft. ODF 1.2 is in committee right now, and it will plug all those holes in ODF, like spreadsheet formulas not being specified, so don't let the fact that you can't do anything useful in the current version without lots of vendor-specific non-standard extensions bother you. Vote for Ron Paul!

  3. Being Diplomatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Insightful
    Please folks, if you're going to comment on this issue be polite and don't use form letters. Refer to government open standards, how OOXML isn't a stable standard and is ungoing massive changes at Ecma, that kind of thing.

    Mostly though emphasis on the "polite" part. Imagine how persuasive someone can be when they're not a dick about it and when they just lay out some good clear arguments :)

    1. Re:Being Diplomatic by kc2keo · · Score: 4, Informative

      correct... another words use constructive criticism should you add input before the decision is made. List the pros and cons and be clear and to the point. Its kind of like a resume... If the employer sees many misspelled words, way to long, or with a font thats hard to read, etc will be ignored. If I was to write in with feedback I would put what I want in bullet points and have the text bold. Under that I will argue the pros and cons etc... I would follow the same form throughout my commenting. I find it to be the best way to get your point across. Forgive my horrible comment grammer but I just wanted to add my comment to the discussion. Getting back to History final exam prep along with the Spanish one... :-(

    2. Re:Being Diplomatic by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 4, Informative

      Refer to government open standards, how OOXML isn't a stable standard and is ungoing massive changes at Ecma

      The problem with that is that ODF is also undergoing massive changes. The version currently working its way through standardization adds the OpenFormula spec to ODF, which is something like 25% of the size of ODF. That's a pretty massive change!

    3. Re:Being Diplomatic by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Insightful

      There is a huge difference between changing the existing spec, so your old code is suddenly incompatible and extending an existing spec. There was no description for formulas, now there is.

  4. When is.... by Creepy+Crawler · · Score: 4, Insightful

    When is a standard not a standard?

    Perhaps... it's when the company who wrote it won't pass it over to standards bodies.

    Perhaps we ought to have "varying" standards for road design... or we should have ever-changing standards for building construction.

    Considering this is public documents are at stake, it is our history. It is no less important than safety.

    --
    1. Re:When is.... by harlows_monkeys · · Score: 3, Interesting
      So when is Sun going to turn control of ODF over to a standards body? (There is a difference between letting a standards body approve a particular version, and turning control over).

      There are zillions of things wrong with OOXML, so why do people keep picking things that are ALSO problems with ODF? It would be a lot more effective to pick those areas where ODF is actually different and better, and push those.

  5. I'm a New York State resident and... by betterunixthanunix · · Score: 4, Interesting

    ...I've just about given up on politicians in this state. Albany has not been able to pass an on time budget for...actually, I don't think I was even born the last time they passed an on time budget. Governor Pataki was a union-busting asshole, and Governor Spitzer has failed to fulfill his promise of restoring integrity to Albany. Hillary Clinton votes for one idiotic bill after another, and Chuck Schumer voted in favor of Mukasey (need I say more?).

    --
    Palm trees and 8
  6. Not even Windows users like OOXML by webmaster404 · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Not even Windows users like OOXML. Even the ones with Office 2007 usually save into .doc format. I don't see why we can't just go with plain old .doc. Sure it isn't as "open" as ODF, but OOo and Office can read them well enough (now if I got to make the plans, it would just be plain .txt, fast and easy to read, who needs formatting) to see what they are saying. But OOXML just plain isn't adopted anywhere, it lacks support for non Windows platforms and no one really knows what the "standard" actually is, and knowing MS's previous actions, they will soon "extend" OOXML to have "features" that will make the free/open source document readers have yet another thing to deal with. So why can't they go with .doc? Or better yet HTML? Even .txt would be better then OOXML, even though ODF is nice, Windows systems with Office need "plugins" to view them.

    --
    There is no "disagree" moderation, and troll, flamebait and overrated are not valid substitutes
    1. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by corsec67 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Which version of .doc?
      They are fairly incompatable, and not even Office can open all of the versions correctly:
      95, 2000, XP, 2003?
      There is no "doc" standard, it is just the memory dump of the version of Office, which changes with each release, and that is the problem.

      TXT would indeed be better, if only because it isn't going to change in the future.

      --
      If I have nothing to hide, don't search me
    2. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by Heir+Of+The+Mess · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I know the parent is probably going to get modded into oblivion, but they made an interesting point that will probably be missed. Why do we need to store all the information in a fully formatted document. I know that good ol' A4...or American Letter standard will persist for a long time, but surely if it's just the information we need to retain there would be a better way of storing it without all the formatting cruft thrown in that makes it hard to decipher if you don't have a massive spec to write a loader from.

      Afterall everyone here is mainly worried about retaining the information in a format that is readable by future generations right? right!?

      --
      Australian running a company that does C# / C++ / Java / SQL / Python / Mathematica
    3. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by Sodki · · Score: 3, Insightful

      TXT would indeed be better, if only because it isn't going to change in the future.

      What kind of TXT? ANSI? Unicode? UTF-16? Big endian? Little endian? etc, etc.. I know, my examples are probably wrong, but the point isn't.
    4. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by webmaster404 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      That is a good point... Just look at the floppy disks, there is lots of them yet readers are hard to find for non 3.5 sized ones. The same could happen to OOXML and other propriatary formats.

      --
      There is no "disagree" moderation, and troll, flamebait and overrated are not valid substitutes
    5. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by 99BottlesOfBeerInMyF · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I don't see why we can't just go with plain old .doc. Sure it isn't as "open" as ODF, but OOo and Office can read them well enough (now if I got to make the plans, it would just be plain .txt, fast and easy to read, who needs formatting) to see what they are saying.

      There are too many, different versions of .doc and no, the majority of programs cannot read and write them "well enough" now. Anyone who's ever managed an archive of documents has probably run into .doc files that cannot be opened by any currently available version of Word. One of the things ODF is solving is the security to know in another 5 years you'll still be able to open your files. The .doc format mess does not provide that security.

      So why can't they go with .doc?

      If the reasons I mentioned above are not enough, it is anti-competitive. It is too burdensome for vendors bidding on writing a new application they want to sell to government contractors to have to reverse engineer a closed format or series of formats and there is no way to be sure it will work in a given instance.

      Or better yet HTML?

      HTML does not handle all the use cases of office documents smoothly and is a pretty terrible format for exchanging documents since in many cases you'd be exchanging entire directories of files instead of a single file since all the resources in HTML are stored by reference.

      ...even though ODF is nice, Windows systems with Office need "plugins" to view them.

      And this is one of the very things adoption of ODF as a standard in large government agencies will change. MS can only hold out so long on making ODF use with MS Office difficult. When they start losing enough sales because their product is not doing what customers want, they'll change it. I'd also note that when the government provides a spec and take bids from vendors, when one vendor tells them "no" and sys they'll have to make do with something that does not meet the spec, then tries to lobby government officials in order to change the spec to one that is inferior for their customer and will cost more in the long run, well maybe it is time to rethink doing business with that vendor at all.

    6. Re:Not even Windows users like OOXML by mabhatter654 · · Score: 2, Informative

      ODF at its heart is a zipped folder of unicode formated text files. In 10 years when nobody cares you can still fire up a perl parser and run thru the files in a standard fashion to pick out your data. OOXML doesn't ever guarantee you will get by with anything less than a full office suite.

  7. Fuck document formats. XHTML and SVG work fine. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Fuck all these document formats. XHTML, CSS, PNG, SVG and PDF work just fine for displaying virtually any sort of data.

    XHTML is the container. It allows for textual documentation to be represented, and allows for other data representations to be embedded within that container. Its native support for tables makes it usable even as a spreadsheet (which can be powered by JavaScript).

    CSS allows for very complex document layout and stylings to specified with ease and conciseness.

    SVG can represent nearly all vector-based pictorials, including many forms of graphs. Bar charts are easily represented with rectangles, and a pie chart is easily represented as a collection of filled arcs. SVG's scalability allows for these charts to be resized really easily.

    PNG images can be used for all other images that aren't best represented using SVG.

    PDF is the perfect format for bundling all of those other resources together in a medium that displays on almost any system.

    Best of all, those are all open standards, with free implementations available for almost every operating system and platform. There's just no need for this ODF and OOXML bullshit.

    1. Re:Fuck document formats. XHTML and SVG work fine. by mmcuh · · Score: 2, Funny

      Except that no one would want to use a JavaScript-powered spreadsheet for anything more advanced that a few simple arithmetic formulas. But sure, as an interchange format it would probably work. Everyone can get their hands on a free standards-compliant browser.

    2. Re:Fuck document formats. XHTML and SVG work fine. by CastrTroy · · Score: 2, Informative

      In case you didn't know, ODF is basically just what you mentioned. If you rename your ODF file to .zip, you can open it and see all those files inside. It doesn't use XHTML, but it does use XML to store the document text and structure. It stores all the style information in another XML document, and it stores all the pictures in a folder called Pictures. All this is wrapped up in a little zip file.

      --

      Anthropic principle: We see the universe the way it is because if it were different we would not be here to see it.
    3. Re:Fuck document formats. XHTML and SVG work fine. by cafelatte · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Ask yourself this question: "Which format would be acceptable by a book publisher?" Books have table of contents, footnotes and indexes. Depending on the typeface size and page width, the footnotes can vary on which page they're on the bottom of. The file formats you mentioned doesn't accommodate this requirement. But you make a good point, those formats should be used more often.

    4. Re:Fuck document formats. XHTML and SVG work fine. by xouumalperxe · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sorry to burst your bubble, but there are several issues with the idea you posted.

      PDF is a great format for publication, but crap for information exchange. You need some sort of "work format" to do the heavy lifting for you before you can commit the document to its published .pdf form. Regarding that "work format", I'll assume that by "XHTML" you actually meant "XML", since the latter is a general purpose mark-up language, and the former a domain-specific application of the latter, and this whole discussion is overkill if you really meant XHTML, since that is simply not enough for a functional office application format.

      XML might have many virtues, but it has one major flaw: It's not a standard. It's a meta-standard. You need a DTD to turn XML into a usable standard to work on -- like XHTML. Guess what, exactly, ODF and OOXML are? Yip, they're at their core just DTDs for specific applications of XML. Funny you should mention SVG for vector graphics: It's just yet another DTD for XML. Effectively, your statement that XML is the solution is in direct contradiction with later saying that OOXML and ODF are unnecessary.

      The idea of "powering a spreadsheet with JavaScript" kind of implies that you're going to embed the actual calculation logic in the spreadsheet, rather than just having a formula language. Nice and light -- or perhaps not. As far as I can see, the only other way to read that statement (which is more or less equivalent in performance) is that you're suggesting writing the calculator core (the one single part of the application you'd really really want to write in highly optimized C) in JavaScript, which is really not that good an idea either.

      CSS might be quite powerful for the web, but for book formatting I'll stick to TeX, thank you very much. That's just an example of a particular application where CSS is underwhelming compared to the alternatives. I'm not much of a fan of writing a gazillion different standards for slightly different application uses, but using CSS as the baseline layout description language for your whole office document format is a hardcore case of shoehorning.

      Finally, and just to nitpick, PNG is really underwhelming for photography and similar image types, where JPEG is far better.

  8. And invent time travel by kseise · · Score: 5, Funny

    Was she required to invent a time machine to meet that deadline? ""In August of 2007, the State of New York passed legislation requiring its CIO, Melodie Mayberry-Stewart, to gather information on the advantages and disadvantages of adopting either ODF or OOXML as a document standard, and to report her findings by 15 January 2007. "

  9. Advice on History final by smittyoneeach · · Score: 4, Insightful

    "in other words" is not spelled "another words".
    Grammar on a final examination is as important as grammar in a letter to your congresscritter.
    May your professor mod up your exam score.

    --
    Get thee glass eyes, and, like a scurvy politician, seem to see things thou dost not.--King Lear
  10. Re:The only thing I want to know.... by ls+-la · · Score: 2, Interesting

    is when Microsoft is going to stop the shennannigans and start playing ball with the rest of the world. When they stop making money off of shenanigans. Innovation takes time and money, it's cheaper to copy other people.

    Can someone tell me when the last time they tried to compete on innovation rather than vendor lock-in? I'm pretty sure that was before I was born.

    Can someone make the argument that OOXML is all about document protection for the consumer and not about keeping everyone else on the run? Probably, but I doubt it would be a very compelling argument.

    Can someone tell me that Vista was supposed to make everything better for the USER? Well, it's supposedly more secure...

    Can someone tell me why I need DRM in my life? I'm sorry, it's not your life. Read the EULA on the last piece of music you heard: "We, the RIAA own your soul. By listening to any music in any form, you agree to this binding contract."

    Can someone tell me that C# is open and not proprietary? It only runs on one platform, theirs? How is that better than writing natively? The UI is only for IE with .NET? Why would I want Silverlight over Flash? Does Microsoft even pretend C# is open? If so, is it covered by any patents (that Java and C don't have prior art on)? And actually, I believe C# runs on all microsoft OSs without recompiling, something they couldn't do without .NET. And I haven't actually seen silverlight, but I haven't heard an argument (convincing or not) to use it.

    Can someone tell me why they took scripting out of the OS? Security, likely.

    Can someone explain to me why Steve Ballmer still has a job? See #1: They're still making money.

    Can someone tell me if they are offering ANYTHING I want? As a user? As a developer? Probably not, but that's why you're using Linux, right?
    Actually, they do have DirectX, and with it a lot of games.

    Can anyone explain what I'm missing here? As long as MS is still making a profit, they'll keep doing what they're doing.

    I'm sick and tired of them making it unnecessarily difficult to do anything with computers. I know they are a business charged with profitability but is it too much to ask them to solve my problems with real solutions? Yep. Money is their only motivation.

    Is it too much too ask them to sell me something without a truckload of baggage?

    I guess maybe it is. Guess you answered your own question there.
  11. Re:I'm going to send them.... by Nazlfrag · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Perhaps because I don't want to encourage a douchebag to work for nothing for a bunch of dataminers?

  12. Oh, Come Now by Vengance+Daemon · · Score: 5, Funny

    Think about it: New York, politics, Microsoft's money, the need for an objective decision. It is just so cute that everyone on Slashdot is discussing this seriously and talking about sending comments in; I wish I had a camera.

    1. Re:Oh, Come Now by calebt3 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Try the "Print Screen" key.

  13. Re:And thus spake the pedant by calebt3 · · Score: 3, Funny

    She has OS 10.5, so no worries.

  14. You do by Titoxd · · Score: 4, Insightful

    You answered your own question. Standardization does not equal adoption, but the State of New York is asking its CIO which format it should adopt. PDF became popular and a de-facto standard before ISO 32000 was approved, so it is important to note that a government is asking for public comment about which format to implement, regardless of ISO status.

  15. Re:"locked in"? by cheater512 · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Thats the thing. You cannot make your own office suite.
    The 'open' standard is incomplete in addition to being a complete mess.

  16. Re:"locked in"? by Fred_A · · Score: 3, Insightful

    In the spirit of open source, screw the MS Office suite. Take the open OOXML standard and write your own office suite. Since you've apparently not followed the saga, the purpose of the MOOXML "standard" is that you cannot reimplement it because it isn't fully specified (in addition to being a festering mess).

    Only Microsoft has the blobs required to make MOOXML work. Only partial compatibility can be attained by other in the best of cases. OTOH ODF actually *is* an open format which is properly documented and which does evolve in the open.

    On top of that, I'm not certain whether all of the Microsoft users can actually read/write MOOXML files. A large number haven't switched to the latest version of Office and don't seem to want to (or cannot if they're on Macs). In small structures I doubt they even know about the translator add ons for their version of Office (if it's even available for their version).

    --

    May contain traces of nut.
    Made from the freshest electrons.
  17. Re:"locked in"? by mattpalmer1086 · · Score: 4, Informative

    Gah. Here's a FAQ you may find useful:

    Q: What does open office and MS Office have to do with a document standard?
    A: Nothing.

    Q: What does the GUI of your word processor have to do with the format you save a document in?
    A: Nothing.

    Q: Why do you need to use open office if you use ODF?
    A: You don't, use whatever software you like.

    Q: What does the open source software development model have to do with open information standards?
    A: Nothing.

    Q: Does using ODF mean that communists will steal my children?
    A: No.

    Q: Will aliens eat my brain if I equate information standards with software implementations?
    A: Yes.

  18. Re:"locked in"? by hey! · · Score: 2, Informative
    Doesn't it matter exactly what the standard does?

    Part of the rationale for OOXML is that organizations and developers can extend it with additional features:

    Second, the custom data are embedded in any OpenXML document in a Custom XML part (3.7.3) and can be described using a Custom XML Data Properties part (4:7.5). By separating these custom data from presentation, OpenXML enables clean data integration, while enabling end-user presentation and manipulation within a wide variety of contexts, including documents, forms, slides, and spreadsheets. Interoperability can thus be achieved at a more fundamental and semantically accurate level.
    (http://www.ecma-international.org/news/TC45_current_work/OpenXML%20White%20Paper.pdf)

    So users (including application vendors) can extend the format to meet future needs. Sounds good, until you realize the claim made above is technically impossible: you can't guarantee semantic interoperability with vendor extensions, only syntactic interoperability. In other words you can parse the custom bits into their components, but you don't necessarily know what to do with them.

    The upshot is that you are not only locked into MS products, you are thoroughly chained to their upgrade cycle as well. One of the great attractions of having a standard is the idea that you should be able to interchange documents between Word 2020 and Word 2015; however this can't be guaranteed. On top of this Microsoft's own track record with consistently rendering its own formats between app versions is poor, and combined with the sloppiness of the OOXML standard, you can't even count on upward compatibility.

    OOXML fabricates entirely new component standards for things like vector drawing instead of using existing standards like SVG. This means you are not only locked into MS products in cases where 90% of the world uses them, but you're nudged into MS products where only 10% of the world uses them.

    Finally, it is inaccurate to frame this as a choice between MS Office and OpenOffice. It would appear that MS is the only organization that can create a fully compliant OOXML implementation, whereas ANYBODY can write ODF, whether they are commercial vendors like IBM/Lotus or open source projects like Abiword or Gnumeric. Furthermore if Microsoft refuses to implement an ODF standard, MS Office users could still work with ODF by several mechanisms, such as an Office VBA extension, through an XSL transformation program, or by saving in a legacy format and processing with the OO import filters. The undocumented proprietary features of the document would of course be stripped out by this, but that's the very point of having a standard: to have your documents in a completely documented format.
    --
    Post may contain irony: discontinue use if experiencing mood swings, nausea or elevated blood pressure.
  19. PDF by blueZ3 · · Score: 2, Informative

    I work in publishing, and the format that we generally use is PDF, for just the reason you state. The typeface, page sizes, etc. are all contained in the PDF file, so there's no problem with footnotes moving pages, because the contents of the pages are fixed in the file.

    I wish PDF were completely open and that we could convince everyone who distributes documents to use PDF for that purpose. All the problems you mention are just as troublesome when opening a Word file on two different machines (which is why "real" writers/publishers don't use Word). I can't tell you the time wasted on some of the rinky-dink (non-paper-published) projects I've seen where two people opening the same Word file saw different things because Word displays pages based on any number of different parameters that are not the same between machines. Heck, it doesn't even PRINT the same as it displays.

    --
    Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com