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."
So let me get this straight:
What is wrong about asking OpenOffice to follow the specs? How about ODF getting an ovarhaul to weed out ambiguities and to properly
What goes around comes around. ODF was initially just a clever assault launched by Sun and IBM. With one strike they propelled ISO into relevance and took Microsoft completely off-guard. But customers saw the light and started demand good standards. Only, it is now evident that ODF and the posterchild OpenOffice were never prepared for the success.
OpenOffice and derivatives, Sun and IBM just have to eat their own dogfood. Admit that the "perfect" ODF was at least partly a hype.
We've seen from the browsers what "lenient" parsing can lead to. It is called tag soup. Requiring all products to leniently compensate for ambiguities in the spec or faulty implementations are definately the wrong path!
The chickens are coming home to roost. Suck it up. Fix it instead of point fingers.
Reading slashdot one-liner: (irm http://rss.slashdot.org/Slashdot/slashdot).rdf.item | fl title,desc*
Most of the world is in chains. They're chained to M$Office by their proprietary document, spreadsheet, presentation etc. formulas.
They're chained to M$ Windoze by the fact that, although you can get a Mac M$Office, you are still screwed in oh, so many ways that eat interoperability.
They are chained to either Windows or MacOs by their media files that can't be transferred to a new computer with another OS because of Digital "Rights" Management (whose rights? one might ask). Sure, iTunes Store dropped DRM, which appears to be a step in the right direction.
If OS'es were interoperable, we probably would have more choice. That some low-level C/C++ code compiles on both Windows and some 'Nix is just that: low-level. The stuff with real portability is run on VMs, and you still have the trouble of translating 'Nix LF chars into Win CR chars or vice versa.
Every problem has a solution that is simple, easy and wrong. Selling our Liberty for a little Security is a much too de
I am beginning to think that Gates Foundation will have a better chance of irradiating malaria in Africa, than Microsoft does at ever satisfying its customers. It seems there is more effort placed in resisting the will of sensible expectations of interoperability and open source creative common, community code. The stupidity of this constant resistance persists like the yellow fever treadmill. This attitude is fueling anti trust lawsuits, Open source application standards, like open office. This futility is just senseless as the African Malaria epidemic that the Gate's Foundation vows to end. Maybe if we can cure all parasitical bloodsucking behavior we can move forward without getting tangled up in repeating the same mistakes and wasted opportunities.
The article states that the plug-in fails to read files created with 2 of the 6. Of the two it "fails" on, one is in BETA, the other is a RC.
It MUST be Microsoft's fault that their proven product that's been on the market for years and is used everywhere, doesn't work when you try to feed it files created in unproven piece of shit applications. Yeah.