Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Releases Specs for Binary Formats
skolima writes "In response to requests for even easier access to the Binary Formats, Microsoft has agreed to remove any intermediate steps necessary to get the documentation. They're going to just post it, making it directly available as a download on the Microsoft web site. Microsoft will also make the Binary Formats subject to its Open Specification Promise by February 15, 2008. They're even planning to include an Open Source converter implementation."
Yes, I'm they will!
Satan: Why did it just get so cold in here?
I hope these intermediate steps that they're eliminating include packaging the documents in an .exe file, and requiring MS Office to be installed. I'm looking at you, Word format!
--Rob
Towards the Singularity.
thats just about every file MS Applications and OS creates no ? unless files are saved in plain ini/text/xml/humanreadable format isnt everything else a form of binary ?
And they will even an Open Source converter implementation
i find myself doing this all the time at work now, and it's embarrassing. I leave entire words out of emails, IMs, etc. I never used to do that. I must be getting old.
Many times, I'll leave out a negating word, like "not", causing me to communicate the wrong idea.
This has to be good. Right ? How will this work with specifications that say "render text like Word 98?" Will Microsoft now document how Word 98 renders ?
Long live the monolith...
Oh wait, there is nothing to bash.... Well, let's invent, for christ sake, this is Slashdot. We sure can do better... Let's say... "Oh yeah, but they are convicted monopolists. Oh, and they replied to a bug 10 years later. Oh, and they suck.".
It's time to realise that Abble's products are the biggest abomination these days. Just say NO to the dumb iAbble way!!
thats the carrot then. so where's the stick?
Wow! It sounds like Microsoft has seen the light! It's only a matter of time now before they start giving away all their software for free.
Because it ensures that the very real possibility of bitrot for the majority of documents written in the last 15 years is now greatly reduced.
There are 4 boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury, ammo. Use in that order. Starting now.
Documentation will be good, but the open source converter does not seem very useful if it converts to Office XML, which no one can implement anyway. Unless this converter is so good that it gives us insight into how Office XML works... but then again, wasn't there discussion of patents on certain parts of the specification? Maybe it still can't be used safely by anyone but Microsoft, even if the source code is available...
Wait, what? Brain not comprehending this. Unless TFA is a complete pack of lies, I'm going to have to give tentative applause. Perhaps the only interesting thing I can think of is that "royalty free" != "we won't sue you into oblivion if we think you're trespassing on our patents". Sorry MS, you taught me to be cynical.
Moderation Total: -1 Troll, +3 Goat
Disclaimer:IANAL
The docs are released under MS' own "Open Specification Promise" *cringes*
http://www.microsoft.com/interop/osp/default.mspx
If you do a search on GPL you get:
Q: Is this Promise consistent with open source licensing, namely the GPL? And can anyone implement the specification(s) without any concerns about Microsoft patents?
A: The Open Specification Promise is a simple and clear way to assure that the broadest audience of developers and customers working with commercial or open source software can implement the covered specification(s). We leave it to those implementing these technologies to understand the legal environments in which they operate. This includes people operating in a GPL environment. Because the General Public License (GPL) is not universally interpreted the same way by everyone, we can't give anyone a legal opinion about how our language relates to the GPL or other OSS licenses, but based on feedback from the open source community we believe that a broad audience of developers can implement the specification(s).
I don't get warm and fuzzy feelings reading this and I think that's the idea...
Obama's legacy: (N)othing (S)ecure (A)nywhere and (T)error (S)imulation (A)dministration
The arbitrary capitalisation of "binary formats" offends my inner grammar nazi.
...and since this is slashdot, it's not good enough until they've also:
1. refunded all money earned through use of these formats
2. allow people to fork them and then demand that their idiot-forks get recombined into the trunk and incorporated into MS Office 09
3. #2 isn't good enough, Microsoft must even make sure that they are in the next release of OO even though they have nothing to do with that product
4. Clipart of Steve Ballmer throwing chairs is included
5. it is released under the GPLv3 license
6. the EU gets to fine them another trillion euros (with a lower-case e) for every day since 1980 that the formats have not been open
7. none of the above points matter because Microsoft sucks anyway and no one @ slashdot uses MS Office, they all use OO (yea, right!)
so go ahead, mod me down you fuckers.
Do the specs come with a 'Click here to buy a license for $0'?
I.e. can I use it in an open source program, or is it hindered by a license that prevents me from distributing it because I can not re-license them?
Microsoft patents ones and zeros
Note that these specs have been available previously, royalty free, just by e-mailing MS (or so they claim), meaning that anybody who wanted them has got them, or can get them.
The only interesting thing here is the converter they're proposing, assuming nobody beats them to it with a better one.
Hell has reached a chilly 32 degrees Fahrenheit
So I guess they'll do anything to get MSOOXML adopted?
Microsoft is releasing the specs for binary document formats. This will help those who want to support and maintain those formats so this is a gift from Microsoft. Fellow residents of Troy, let us be grateful and embrace this great offering.
or there's no way they'd be doing this. Well, it is Microsoft so there are likely to be some problems. For instance, they could post 10,000 lines of assembly or just plain crappy C code and say, 'there you go, it's open'. Not so bad in itself but not very easy to use none the less.
But what is really probably happening here is that ODF is getting adopted around the world by governments and once you go ODF, it's going to be a tough sell back to the pull-the-rug-out-from-under-your-feet Microsoft way. Anyways, if Microsoft really sees ODF as a credible threat, getting MS Office OXML through ISO is important, very important. But, once they can do that and gain back credibility, there is NOTHING to stop them from releasing software which others are not privy too. ie, change the format and keep everyone else chasing them.
Remember, ISO will not be in control of the changes to the spec, Microsoft will be.
So watch out for this good-guy mask being applied. We've seen nothing to say there isn't anything but the same old Microsoft hiding behind it. And no, I would not accept this as a first step and something to trust. ODF and open access to your own created data is too important to let a simple trick undermine it all. IMO.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
Read the blog entry and didn't see it mentioned.
but this is a very positive move on the part of Microsoft.
Wait a second, does this include Exchange? If so, that's huge.
I thought the tag "missingword" meant they had left out the specifications for Word formats...
Again!
This is some interoperability play most likely to placate some government entity without actually doing much. It is the equivalent of the skin of an onion.
This is also temporary as Microsoft has already made well known their intentions to move to signed drivers only. After signed drivers comes signed applications. What good will any of this do if you can't run the app without microsoft's blessing?
FYI: http://www.alex-ionescu.com/?p=24 (related topic and safe for work)
http://www.maxineudall.com/2010/02/should-economists-be-sued-for-malpractice.html
As covered in this link, it appears that most of these specifications have either been removed or documented. What this does mean is that perhaps it will be possible to truly understand what these formatting hooks refer to, not what MS have documented them as referring to...
(Thanks to zmotula for the link)
Is crushing a suspect's child's testicles illegal?
John Yoo: "No, [if] the President thinks he needs to do that."
I felt a great disturbance in the Force, as if millions of geeks crying out in terror were suddenly silenced.
It might look good, but you have to remember that MS apps don't follow MS specifications, so it won't allow you to fully read real ms docs...
I dunno. I'll wager the OO.org folks won't be too upset if they can peer into the formats and clean up the errors still floating around in their reverse-engineering job.
Not that I'm putting these guys down. OO.org does a damn impressive job with Word 97-2003 documents.
The world's burning. Moped Jesus spotted on I50. Details at 11.
... Lucifer has announced the launch of a massive advertisement campaign to promote the opening of his new snow park under the brand "Hell Inc."
But why the hoops. The Microsoft site says
you may be eligible to participate in a Royalty-Free File Format Program and to receive technical documentation for certain Microsoft Office binary file formats.
Er, why not just put um on a website.
Be open or not.
All the people who didn't get their chance to flame yesterday and wound up with mod points today.
Sometimes I picture mods sitting there reading through the posts talking under their breath like a kid playing a video game: "Oh, got that one... here's another... Slam! Nailed you, you slashdotting fool... Bam! There's another one! Die, troll, die!"
Interested in a Flash-based MAME front end? Visit mame.danzbb.com
The release of the specs doesn't improve the physical bit rot of the data/media itself - which is the main definition of bit rot. Of course, I guess wikipedia does support your definition too. I just wanted to be clear that there are other challenges beside keeping the specifications/software reader around.
They must be worried sick about the ISO meeting in February, scheduled for a week after this grand opening. It's make or break time for MS-OOXML.
Up to now, the binary formats were specifically excluded from open source developers. Will that change?
I do not know how to feel just now.
OSGGFG - Open Source Gamers Guide to Free Games
Microsoft is pushing so hard to get "Open" XML adopted by the ISO that they're really dropping their pants here. Regardless of what ISO does, both "Open" XML and the legacy formats are now wide open for interoperability work to be done by the free world.
Pointy haired morons demanding the use of a $500 office suite cannot prevail forever. Commoditization is a very strong force but sometimes it takes a while to do its thing.
Tired of FB/Google censorship? Visit UNCENSORED!
From wiki: a representation for numbers using only two digits (usually, 0 and 1) Nex week Microsoft will release specs for Octal format We're expecting full disclosure for Hexadecimal to follow soon.
What exactly are the Binary Formats? Surely this isn't the complete spec of all doc, xls, and ppt files? To what extent does this address technical issues with OOXML?
"This has to be good. Right ?
/windows/system/explorer.dll /windows/system/kernel.dll
How will this work with specifications that say "render text like Word 98?" Will Microsoft now document how Word 98 renders ?"
I'm sure there'll be some nice documents to tell you exactly how each of these statements work. You know, things like:
1)open file
2)scan for 0x06660666
3)take the next 128 bytes and pass them to winRulesAll(*DWORD) in
4)take the resulting array of 8bit vectors and sequentially call winConvertToBlob[0-255](LoByte(DWORD)) in
5)concatenate the results from those calls and send to sysDecryptWord95Text(URL,*DWORD) in mplayer.dll with URL=http://microsoft.com/secretdoor.asp
6)replace those 128 bytes with the results from the call or, if failed, render text like Word 95.
Easy as pie.
LoB
"Anyone who stands out in the middle of a road looks like roadkill to me." --Linus
The GPL is a software license, so they couldn't really release a specification under GPL. :)
If all their stuff is just 'they won't sue you if you use this specification', then it is compatible with the GPL
Patents Drive Free Software as Hurricanes Drive Construction Industry
My mother e-mailed MS once... once....
Are you sure those aren't chairs?
Support Right To Repair Legislation.
The trick will be for a bunch of slashdoters to join the open source project and add the ability to convert them to ODF. If Microsoft doesn't allow it, fork it.
From the "I'll believe it when I see it" department.
What the hell is all this crap about "open and level playing field"?!? Are you kidding me?
Look, we can idealize society all we want, but putting on blinders and not seeing reality is just foolish.
If you come up in a fight against Tito Ortiz, you sure as hell want a baseball bat. You might call that leveling the playing field, but that's only the case because Tito has an advantage in the first place. *HE* doesn't want to give up his strength, size and experience to your baseball bat just because you want a fair fight. Only the guy with the up-hill battle wants the fair fight!
The underdogs always cry foul and always want someone, some government agency, some legal entity, to come to their aid and "level the playing field". Hogwash I say. The guy that has the advantage, at some point, did something right (right in the sense that it got them an advantage) that the underdog didn't do. They deserve their status as favorite because they worked for it.
The underdog can still get an advantage any time they want, with the right effort. Microsoft doesn't hold the equivalent of a doomsday bomb. They CAN be beat. Yes, it's harder now. They've made it EXTREMELY difficult to compete against them, and certainly they've done so at times in ways that are morally objectionable. I wish the world was such where we could count on everyone to act reasonably and morally, in which case wanting a level playing field might be reasonable, but that's not the reality.
Besides, when has the human race as a whole ever shied away from a challenge because it was "too hard"? We've been to the moon for crying out loud! Are you telling me someone can't figure out a way, level playing field or not, to beat Microsoft? Hey, *I* don't know how to do it, but there's plenty of people smarter than me that have got to be able to figure it out.
So let's stop whining all the damned time, let's stop idealizing things and bitching about how there should be a level, fair playing field. NO THERE SHOULD NOT. Those that out-work the rest should have the advantages they've earned, and those that haven't achieved that should just tighten their belts and man the fuck up and get it done, overcome the odds (which they made longer by being out-hustled in the first place).
If you're David, you're not going to beat Goliath by bitching and moaning about your pitiful slingshot and how someone should "make it fair" and give you a bazooka, you need to figure out how to build an F-16 yourself and get things done. All the complaining in the world isn't going to make that happen.
Is it just me, or does this story remind anyone of The Onion headline, "Microsoft patents ones and zeros"
Just because Microsoft is planning to do it, it doesn't mean it will stick to its own plan! Need I remind of all the glorious features consumers were promised in Vista, that were eventually scraped out?!?!
And using Feb 15th as a date to launch the project, right before the voting dates (Feb 25-29), seem to be yet another hype by MS...
If MS intended to make it open, it could've done so long time ago...
Mod points are a dangerous tool. Abuse them wisely.
The headline is wrong. Microsoft has not openly released the specs. They've said they are going to do so. Not the same thing.
Remember when they released some specifications in copy-protected Office documents?
This is a VERY good thing because it ensures that the very real possibility of bitrot for the majority of documents written in the last 15 years is now greatly reduced.
I think the time window might need to be reduced a bit. Back in the 90s Microsoft used to publish the Word and Excel document formats. I recall that the specs/formats were downloadable from their website.
Close, but you missed out a ")". If you sign our NDA I might tell you where.
The only Notepad specific "file type" is a .LOG text file, where the ASCII '.', 'L', 'O', 'G' is the file magic in the first four characters (might require after, I forget). It appends the date and time whenever you open the file. It's still "ANSI" format, but it does special stuff if it is there.
It seems clear to me that Microsoft is not bound to use MSOOXML as the defailt format for any of their software. They can continue to evolve and evolve starting with Office 2009.
They just need to be able to Open and Save As whatever finally gets through ISO.
Then they aren't forced into ODF, and they can still use a proprietary format by default--and they can still claim to follow an open standard. Most people won't understand why they need to save as "ISO DIS 29500 something something" and will just keep chugging along using the default Office formats.
ISO DIS 29500 will become the next RTF. Sure you _could_ use it, but very few do.
and in 1 year they'll sue every other office application into the ground for patent infringement...
The MAFIAA is a bunch of mindless jerks who will be the first up against the wall when the revolution comes
Once again, it looks like MS is set to out-OSS teh FOSS.
Everyone is eager to get their hands on MS code. Lunix code? Not so much. Been there, seen that, it's nothing great. And more importantly... it's nothing consumers want.
...they've just changed Office to an unintelligible XML format that's defective by design.
v.tr.
1. To decide on; choose.
2. To yearn for; desire: "She makes you will your own destruction" George Bernard Shaw.
3. To decree, dictate, or order.
4. To resolve with a forceful will; determine.
5. To induce or try to induce by sheer force of will: We willed the sun to come out.
6. To grant in a legal will; bequeath.
v.intr.
1. To exercise the will.
2. To make a choice; choose. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/will
Medium cat is MEDIUM.
I don't get the big whoop. So, they're making it easier to convert .doc files to .docx files? And that's supposed to get us all excited, and is such a goshdarn VERY BIG DEAL, according to some of the posters here? What is so wonderful about that?
And also, they're allowing folks to download some specs instead of having to email to get them, specs they've been providing since 1997? What has happened on Slashdot? Is it really so exciting to learn that you've been alleviated from having to write one single email in your life, that you throw a Slashdot party?
So again, please explain, why is this a big deal? I see nothing new, or interesting, here from Microsoft at all.
Try the following example:
1) Open notepad creating a new text file
2) Type the following: Bush hid the facts
3) Save the text file
4) Close notepad
5) Open the text file again
Spooky...
(Many of you will have seen this before since it's an old trick. For those of you who don't know, it's caused by a unicode detection bug)
Microsoft Techincal Release 4354345
Microsoft Binary Format
0
1
Notes: values greater than 1 are reserved for internal Microsoft use.