Another round of ODF vs OOXML
Posted on May 30th, 2008 at 8:28
After Microsoft's push of OOXML through the ISO fast-track standardization process, two important things have happened.
First of all, Microsoft has announced it would add ODF support to Office 2007, but not OOXML. Secondly, South Africa and Brazil have both appealed the ISO decision.
I've written before about the use of standards as corporate weapons. It looks like the war continues.
You can add India to that list.
First off, the following are questions not statements:
- Is it true that the ODF format is much smaller/simpler than the OOXML format
and therefore lacks important features such as accessibility?
- If this is the case, wouldn't Open Office be better off using OOXML
- Is it not true the people behind ODF (or at least some of them) are looking
to abandon the specification and thinking about yet another improved specification?
- Why do people hate OOXML, just because Microsoft came up with it or is there a more valid reason?
PS: I don't care which specification "wins" (if any), I'd just rather not have a VHS vs Video-2000 (or Blu-Ray vs HDDVD)
scenario all over again, certainly not for the wrong reasons.
Some replies:
The ODF standard is approx 600 pages. OOXML's specification is 6000 pages. When it comes to standards, smaller is better because there is less room for (mis)interpretation.
Never heard this before. Do you have any reference to back up this claim?
I don't think it is "just because Microsoft came up with it". Besides a lot of technical objections there is the clear abuse of the ISO standardization process. See here and here.
Woops ... four
As for a more valid reason: here is a nice list of technical complaints.
Turns out Denmark's letter is more an informal protest rather than an actual complaint, but with Venezuela complaining we currently have four complaints and one protest.
There's a podcast somewhere where one of the people who was on the OSI commity explains the differences
and the problems. I'll have to find it again, can't remember which one it was.
Post new comment