Advertisement
Promo

Office applications Toolkit

Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

  • Previous comment

Posted by: Albert (Wednesday 27 February 2008, 10:16 AM)

  • Reply

Google motivation

I was stating the motivation for Google to be against the format. They are using a competing format that is less feature rich. That is why Google is against OOXML becoming an ISO standard, because then Google will have to compete more against office software that has features Google apps cannot provide (at least for a while).

You suggest that google cannot use OOXML but the specs are publicly availiable for more than a year now and google. Also google is able to interprete the old binary office formats of which the specification are a lot less good than OOXML spec.

The ODF format Google is using cannot supply the needs for a faithfull representation of most current document so when converting to ODF you will loose information. The OOXML format does allow faithfull represnetaion of the data in current MS Office files after conversion. This is very important for many of the current Office users which have billions of existing Office documents. Also the OOXML format is a lot more feature rich than ODF and can support the features currently used in MS Office. To support the features in MS Office in a simpler format like ODF it would require extensive MS extensions to ODF which would cripple ODF for any other users. Even now it is difficult for the different ODF implementation to interprete OpenOffice propriety features in ODF. This would become a lot more difficult if ODF documents were to consist more of propriety extensions than official standard complient code.

Btw, referring to the consortium info is like referring to the Linux foundation as Andy writing that blog is a director of the Linux foudation and a laywer working with IBM in an anti-ooxml crusade. He is also aprticipating in the anti-ooxml meeting in Geneva at the moment sitting in a panel with IBM VP Bob Sutor.

So the consortiuminfo blog, I read as an IBM blog (of course it very visibly often directly referring to the blogs of IBM employees like Bob Sutor)

Private message disabled

Albert

Albert
n/a
Member since: January 2007

Site Activity Rating:

1

 


  • Previous comment

  • Reply to this comment
  • Return to story
  • Report this as offensive


Full Talkback thread

Story: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

  1. Very nice Albert lars
  2. Microsoft double-tongued Anonymous123
  3. ODF useless for Microsoft needs Albert
  4. OOXML is fully open Albert
  5. Sorry, the comment was cut short. Here'... garyedwards
  6. Reasons for lack of interoperbility in ODF Albert
  7. ODF, The Big Picture Goldie Simmons
  8. Breaking the Web garyedwards
  9. Google has invested in competing format Albert
  10. Document standards 2000355890
  11. Questioning Google’s objectiveness harpless
  12. Microsoft's Argument is Ridiculous Goldie Simmons
  13. insufficient and unnecessary standard, designed pu... ator1940
  14. Interoperability and the binary ODF conversion di... garyedwards
  15. A bit of background... Anonymous123
  16. Microsoft moves forward with OOXML SDK Karen Friar ZD
  17. The rest of the text in the previous tal... lars
  18. Google motivation Albert
  19. Which OOXML features in particular can't... Chris Rankin
  20. XML in spirit isn't going to be as effic... Anonymous123
  21. But does even Microsoft Office use OOXML... Chris Rankin
  22. Thanks Gary, very informative Goldie Simmons
  23. Durusau's proposal is preposterous Marbux
  24. A very Interesting Take Moley
  25. Features not in ODF Albert
  26. OOXML performance explained Albert
  27. Office and OOXML David Meyer ZD
  28. MS Office 2007 does fully support O... Albert
  29. ISO Credibility garyedwards
  30. Thank you for an intelligent r... Anonymous123
  31. Of course ODF isn't backwards... Chris Rankin
  32. Then why add "read"... Chris Rankin
  33. 00o writes compliant files Goldie Simmons
  34. You are contradicting Rupert G... Chris Rankin
  35. Terse markup for speed -- NOT Marbux
  36. Tail end of previous comment garyedwards
  37. Cut to the chase garyedwards
  38. ODF also has backwards compati... Albert
  39. MS influencing ODF development... Albert
  40. No, OOo is not fully complient... Albert
  41. MS Office 2007 files fully val... Albert
  42. That's OK, I contradict R... Rupert Goodwins ZD
  43. Widespread support for OOXML a... Albert
  44. Actually OOXML is not really t... Albert
  45. Actually MS Office 2007 compli... Albert
  46. Actually, you're making all th... Chris Rankin
  47. It's a question of greate... Chris Rankin
  48. Questions for the community Goldie Simmons
  49. Do tell me more, Albert Marbux
  50. Albert, give me a single examp... Marbux
  51. Open Standards Moley
  52. If you plan for incompatiblity... Albert
  53. Believe is in the prove Albert
  54. ODF and OOXML are standards in... Marbux
  55. explaination Albert
  56. ODF better readable but less g... Albert
  57. Interoperability Albert
  58. OOXML is Open Albert
  59. Then why does the same spreads... Marbux
  60. Extensions are bugs, not featu... Marbux
  61. OOXML interop is abysmal Marbux
  62. Extensions to ODF realistic ? Albert
  63. Undocumented eXtensions and St... garyedwards
  64. Not 1,500 extensions Marbux
  65. You've got to be kidding,... Marbux

Back to: Google: OOXML 'insufficient and unnecessary'

Video icon

Video

Discussions

Shibley R Shibley R

Brand (again)

Monday 21 December 2009, 7:29 PM

1 comment
Xwindowsjunkie Xwindowsjunkie

Copyright in a new light

Monday 21 December 2009, 7:00 PM

4 comments
Xwindowsjunkie Xwindowsjunkie

Twitter hack was DNS redirect

Monday 21 December 2009, 6:33 PM

1 comment

Vista Upgrade Blog

How to Upgrade From Windows Vista to W...

Did you get the news? Microsoft has unzipped its kitty and kept its latest, supposedly the best, offering on display. This is the brand new version of Microsoft operating system, named... More

Post a comment

Tinsel on the TARDIS

There were shepherds on the hill, and the Doctor popped his head out of the TARDIS and said "you might want to see this" and they were astounded. WHY do we pay for a TV license?... More

Post a comment

Can I have fries with that? (Consumer...

Licence policies of Tech company's have been for a long time both complicated and 'Dick Turpin-esque', people just click 'I agree' without reading the Agreement. I do the same, but... More

1 comment


Skip Sub Navigation Links to CNET Brand Links

Help

Become part of the ZDNet community.

Newsletters