Slashdot Mirror
Office 2007SP2 ODF Interoperability Very Bad
David Gerard writes "Microsoft Office 2007 SP2 claims support for ODF 1.1. With hard work and careful thinking, they have successfully achieved technical compliance but zero interoperability! MSO 2007sp2 won't read ODF 1.1 from any other existing application, and its ODF is only readable by the CleverAge plugin. The post goes into detail as to how it manages this so thoroughly."
Even if MS fails all interoperability (which I would bet they do), at least someone could use ODF with office 2007 and 10-20 years later be able to use the spec to develop an app to recover the documents.
If it achieves 100% technical compliance with the standard, but zero interoperability, this is certainly a problem with the standard itself.
And the problem in this case is the missing formula specification. It's not in ODF 1.1, and ODF 1.2 is still a draft. While this is Microsoft and we all "know" that this was intentional, ODF is what should be fixed first. We were all bashing OOXML specifications, but ODF 1.1's far from perfect, as we can see.
Did the author of the article test with anything else than a spreadsheet with formulas? Formula breakage was expected and mentioned in the comments to the previous article. The interesting part is are there other flaws with ODF 1.1, are they addressed by 1.2?
This is one of the best-written articles submitted to slashdot in a long time. Not only is it well-written (at least, it didn't make my brain hurt) but it gives you the technical background AND it tells you in advance how to debunk the stupid arguments which will certainly by coming from M$ trolls and astroturfers. Scrapbook this one, kids. You're going to be referring back to it for months, if not years.
"You're right," Fisheye says. "I should have set it on 'whip' or 'chop.'"
Never ascribe to malice that which is adequately explained by incompetence
Of course, I am not that cynical. I was taught to never assume malice where incompetence would be the simpler explanation. But the degree of incompetence needed to explain SP2's poor ODF support boggles the mind and leads me to further uncharitable thoughts. So I must stop here.
from the referenced article....
http://www.robweir.com/blog/
If you keep throwing chairs, one day you'll break windows....
No surprise that MS has done this. What it does show, however, is that the ODF standard is incomplete. If MS can write out an ODF compliant file that no-one lese can read, ODF has a problem. In an odd sort of a way, MS are doing us a favour here by shaking out the holes. Role on ODF 1.2.
Yes, it's worth noting that the article only addresses that one filetype. On the other hand, it removes the formulas from spreadsheets when loading them, and writes formulas back out in an Excel-only syntax that nothing else can read. If that's MS's idea of shippable, consumer-ready interoperability I don't hold out much hope for its compatability with other file types. Its behavior reads like a half-assed homework assignment from a student who didn't give a shit.
No kidding!!! What do you say at this point?
I was thinking exactly the same thing. If MS have made a compliant implementation but it isn't compatible with anyone else's, doesn't that mean that ODF is broken? Isn't this exactly the sort of complaint certain people around here have made against Microsoft's own formats in the past: just because there's a standard that officially states what the document format is, it's no use if other people can't realistically implement it and then trust that interoperability will work?
If you disagree, post your argument. (-1, Overrated) isn't your personal censorship tool for views you don't like.
Well, that depends on who you talk to. Here in the US, that's probably true. Pretty much it's up to Europe to send the lawyers back in.
But, there is a comment at the end of the article to check for an obvious abuse:
The only way for Microsoft to make their legacy ODF documents work and to exclude other vendors would be to specifically look in the document for the name of the application that created the documentThis should be simple to test with a text editor, change the name of the application to match one that works and test that.
Since I don't have access to Office 2007 until I get home tonight, I can't try this out. But if someone feels compelled in the meantime, I'd love to see the results. If the document "magically" works after changing the header, then Microsoft did *not* do enough to keep the lawyers at bay.
Oh course. This has always been true with Microsoft, where in the late 80s/early 90s they advertised they could read WordPerfect files from Amigas or Macs, but all it did was strip all the formatting to leave-behind plain text. Yuck. Even later when Word was released for early PowerMacs, I found that Windows Word could not read the Word documents from my Macintosh.
Microsoft does not want interchanging of information. They want everybody using MS Word on an MS operating system. The end.
FOX NEWS.com should be BANNED from television and internet. Have the Congress take it over and give us Truespeak.
On the other hand, open source coders have been reverse-engineering Microsoft document formats for years. Couldn't Microsoft, just this once, return the favor in the name of interopability?
You really think so? The EU will probably slap them with a hefty fine yet again. This is just another example of Microsoft being deliberately anti-competitive.
Except if you look a little closer, the EU doesn't just fine them. The fine is trivial, and does nothing but make the news in the computer press. Just money. A fine is like a parking ticket. And if you are rich enough, you can theoretically see a parking ticket as a parking fee.
Forcing them to correct the problem to the satisfaction of a neutral third party acting as a technical "expert witness" however, is a worthwhile activity. And this can really sting. This is more like taking away their car, or revoking their license. Way more than a slap on the wrist and a stern look.
It is difficult to get a man to understand something when his job depends on not understanding it.
Self-replying, I know, but I just thought of something else.
According to TFS, Office fails to load ODF files created by any other application. If those files are compliant with ODF standards, the blame for this lies squarely on Microsoft. They fail to open standards-compliant ODF files.
Conversely, if the files produced by MS Office are valid standards-compliant ODF files (which they may be according to the letter of the standard) we should also blame the other apps if they fail to use them, isn't so? They will also fail to open standards-compliant ODF files.